tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20406961.post6142300540580974160..comments2023-06-07T09:13:41.693-05:00Comments on Episcopal Chaplain On the High Ground: Williams' New Ecclesiology and the Draft Covenant: The Church of England ResponseMarshall Scotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02807749717320495495noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20406961.post-69037201576485085102008-01-07T15:06:00.000-06:002008-01-07T15:06:00.000-06:00The GS can only get as much power as the rest of t...The GS can only get as much power as the rest of the communion will give them, and I don't see Archbishop Williams backing down on his view of how this next Lambeth ought to run unless he sees some overwhelming drive for it to be changed.<BR/><BR/>One of the things I like about Rowan is his focus on consensus at the communion level. While that has worked against TEC in the recent past, it can just as easily work against the GS, especially since many of them seem ot have very little interest in doing the hard work of building consensus.<BR/><BR/>JonJonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13323740465436735706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20406961.post-92159493901626763902008-01-04T22:06:00.000-06:002008-01-04T22:06:00.000-06:00Jon, thanks. Yes, I am using "official" in that j...Jon, thanks. Yes, I am using "official" in that judicatory sense. I think that prior to the Dromantine meeting of the Primates (and perhaps to the Windsor Report) we might have worked with the Instruments to provide "a quick reference." However, the interpretation of the Dromantine meeting that calling Lambeth 1998 1.10 "the mind of the Communion" was roughly equivalent to calling it an encyclical from the Vatican put that juridical meaning of "official" on the table. Subsequent statements from Global South primates, both individually and from meetings of the Global South Steering Committee, have affirmed their explicit desire to see what we would call previously (and literally) a "mind of the house resolution" as rather juridically "official." With that recent past I think we would do well to be wary. These are people who <I>do</I> want Lambeth to establish doctrine, and who <I>do</I> want the executive authority to enforce it.<BR/><BR/>Indeed, for most of the history of the Lambeth Conference it was just as you describe: a periodic meeting for consultation producing a description of positions about which there was some consensus. Changes as former colonies became nations, and former colonial extension of the Church of England became national churches in their own right, revealed cultural issues that deserved respect, but that also made consensus harder to come by. Ever increasing speed of communication, and consequent increasing exposure to our differences, have sometimes made it easier to share, and sometimes made it easier to fight. Some believe that winning the fight, rather than increasing the sharing in a context of respect, is the way to meaningful communion. They will, I fear, get for themselves what they want; but I for one would not want them to have "executive authority" over the Anglican Communion or the Episcopal Church.Marshall Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02807749717320495495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20406961.post-91561943613279505492008-01-04T08:53:00.000-06:002008-01-04T08:53:00.000-06:00The way you're using official seems to suggest som...The way you're using official seems to suggest something juridically binding. I was thinking of it more as a quick reference for those who lack the time and/or inclination to hunt through hundreds of pages of conflicting opinions from mulitple sources when they ask questions like "What do Anglicans think about abortion?" Granted the reality is going to be more complicated, but many people can probably do quite well with only a set of basic principles and positions. The usefulness of that sort of quick reference guide can also be seen by thinking about how we might know when the rest of the Communion is sufficiently comfortable with the idea of other provinces having partnered gay or lesbian bishops that we can stop worrying about that as a potentially communion breaking issue. The ACC, Lambeth, and the Primates are all more or less equally good at providing that sort of quick reference although a Gallup poll or something like that could work just as well. Each has strengths and weaknesses. Lambeth includes the most people making it both the most unwieldy and the most likely to include the broadest range of views. The Primate's meeting includes the least amount of people and so is the easiest to pull together when it is felt that some sort of rapid response is needed. The ACC is in the middle. I'm not inclined to worry about the fact that Lambeth and the Primates meeting only include bishops for a variety of reasons, including the fact that supposedly more representative bodies like GC can easily do a lousy job of actually being representative (IIRC there have been debates on the HOBD on precisely how well GC represents TEC), and the fact that most bishops have some idea of what sort of things their diocese will let them get away with.<BR/><BR/>JonJonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13323740465436735706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20406961.post-6508753246287236802008-01-03T12:25:00.000-06:002008-01-03T12:25:00.000-06:00I believe there was great pain in the Church in Rw...I believe there was great pain in the Church in Rwanda (as well as in Burundi); but not so great that there was no one to ask for help. <BR/><BR/>I think it would be interesting to think about what sort of support might be possible, and how that support might be reviewed by ACC. However, the real reduction in the authority of the ACC proposed in the initial Draft and apparently supported in the re-Draft leaves me uneasy about the whether the decision could be made in that one truly representative body. In the United States, where Designated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight (DEPO) has been tried in good faith, it appears to have worked. Where it hasn't worked it's largely because those requesting oversight had already predetermined that existing structures were inadequate/inappropriate.<BR/><BR/>As for an "official way of recognizing" changing opinions: between Lambeth Conferences the "constitutional processes" of the various national churches go on. They issue opinions in their various means. Those opinions can be part of the discussion and consultation in ACC (which I think should meet more often) and the Primates' Meetings (which I think should meet less often), and we can benefit from their consultations and reflections. It's hard to acknowledge changes in "official" statements from Lambeth, when we're not sure yet just how "official" statements from Lambeth are.<BR/><BR/>What could help with that? Perhaps a process in Lambeth built on concensus building, rather than on passing resolutions. Perhaps an agreement of some sort (I'm wary of the word "covenant" in light of the current Draft), in which participants agree to a process that establishes what is "official," and what "official" means (even if ultimately the Episcopal Church is unable to sign on).<BR/><BR/>And perhaps a recognition that opinions in the Church in fact may take decades to change, despite the illusion created by rapid communications. In that case, some may seem to change too rapidly, and some may seem to resist too long; and in either case we allow time to see the fruits.Marshall Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02807749717320495495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20406961.post-74606728855024984702008-01-03T08:51:00.000-06:002008-01-03T08:51:00.000-06:00Wasn't there a major crisis in one of the AFrican ...Wasn't there a major crisis in one of the AFrican provinces (Rwanda IIRC) which resulted in the ecclesial structure being decimated? How can the communion help in a situation like that if they absolutely must get permission from the national church first? Granted the possibility of intervention can be abused, but if it requires the consent of the ACC it is less then likely to be possible to use it as a weapon to try to settle controversies.<BR/><BR/>As for the Primates acting as an executive council for Lambeth, concider how many different things Lambeth conferences have given an opinion on. If opinions start shifting rapidly between Lambeth Conferences it might be convenient to have some sort of official way of recognizing that shifting of opinion.<BR/><BR/>JonJonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13323740465436735706noreply@blogger.com