Church Of England Gives OK To Anglican Covenant

By Al Webb
Religion News Service

LONDON (RNS) The Church of England, defying opposition from its traditionalist wing, has given its support to a global covenant aimed at keeping the Anglican Communion intact in the face of disputes over homosexuality and female bishops.

The Church's General Synod has voted its preliminary approval of draft legislation that could be put to a final ballot within two years. The draft now goes to dioceses for their consideration.

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, who heads the 77-million-strong worldwide Anglican Communion, has tossed his full support to the proposed covenant -- but conservative Anglicans have already stepped in to try to scuttle the project.

The proposal has received a cool reception in Anglicanism's American branch, the Episcopal Church, which sparked a global furor with its decisions to consecrate openly gay bishops in 2003 and 2010.

A statement by leaders of the British-based Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans said the covenant, while "well-intentioned," was nevertheless "fatally flawed," and therefore "support for this initiative is no longer appropriate."

That statement has been endorsed by archbishops from West Africa, Rwanda, Tanzania, Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya and Australia, as well as the Anglican Church in North America, a splinter group formed from the Episcopal Church.

Backers of the proposed covenant, which was passed by the General Synod on Nov. 24, said the document offers a road map to the resolution of various disputes. The draft covenant does not adopt a position over gay clergy or other divisive issues, but is intended to provide communal standards that would bind the Anglican Communion's 38 provinces.

But even some who have voted for the legislation appear uneasy about it. Bishop of Gloucester Michael Perham said he voted in favor with "some reluctance."

Still, the bishop told the French news agency Agence France-Presse, "not to vote for it is to make more difficult the task of the archbishop of Canterbury in his ministry to the Communion."

"I want to strengthen, not weaken, his hand," Perham said.

Comments

[Cranmer1549]

10:08 AM on 12/01/2010

The Episcopal Church, the Anglican Church of Canada and any other province that doesn't wasn't to be controlled by the Southern Cone and African churches should repudiate the Anglican Covenant. It is plain and simple a means to control and shut up more progressive provinces. Pope Rowan Cantuar and his Latin American and African cardinals will enforce order as they see fit. Remember, my namesake said "the Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England." It is time to say that "the Archbishop of Canterbury hath no jurisdiction in this realm"!

[TomFox]

10:28 AM on 12/01/2010

Here, Here Thomas Cranmer.

BTW, Hope you're well and look forward to seeing more posts from you.

[Cranmer1549]

10:43 AM on 12/01/2010

Same to you!

[MilesToGo]

01:07 PM on 12/01/2010

Rowan Williams and the Latin American & African bishops will hardly "enforce order as they see fit." The draft of the covenant meant to resolve the gender and sexual disputes is being sent out to all dioceses for considerations and amendments. Archbishop Williams knows quite well that he is a figurehead leader only without power similar to the Roman Catholic pope. Your charge that Williams is looking out for institutional integrity is, of course, correct. Why wouldn't he?

[Cranmer1549]

01:46 PM on 12/01/2010

You're absolutely right - Rowan Cantuar won't be given the powers of a pope. Under Section 4 of the AC, he will only be given the power to expel disobedient provinces from the Anglican Communion.

It's high time for the Episcopal Church and other like-minded provinces to expel themselves from the Anglican Communion. They have more in common with the Evangelical Lutherans and Old Catholics than the rest of the Anglican world.

[sunshine14]

08:58 AM on 12/01/2010

God has no slaves, all are his children. God did not force christ to come. God asked who shall I send. Christ said send ME>

[DannyEVillage]

09:27 PM on 12/02/2010

Actually, it was Isaiah who said, "send me."

[sunshine14]

08:48 AM on 12/01/2010

God created all and all that God created, he gave Free will to choose. God forces NO one., nor holds no one in his bondage. God gave us all equality rights, God gave that which is all good. God the richest of All gave All he has and shares, distributes equality rights to all. God gave us his very IMAGE. Nothing less. The problem lies that we are not satisfied with what God created us to be, our very important valuable purpose, which is able to protect provide serve in sharing what we are , with others. We become gluttons, greedy, unsatisfied, not happy with God's gift purpose for us, which all are valuable equal to God. Greed jealousy sets in. So we do not come into the perfection for the purpose God created us to be. We reject the love of God, his gift of life, not being satisfied, like a spoiled child.  

God is not a punishing God, those who did not accept God or his gift, or purpose for which God created them to be, God more or less said, ok, just removed them from God's family, God's kingdom.

Nonviolent, Do what you chose then. God did not destroy and mu_der Lucifier, did HE? Lucifier chose out of jealousy, his own greed, not being satisfied,  that Lucifier,  to wanted a Kingdom, to be worshiped like God, be greater then God.
God said ok, just removed Lucifer from his Kingdom, God's family, thus Lucifier chose not to be a son of God, or belong to God's family or Kingdom, thus  became Satan, who was removed from God's Kingdom, along with Satan angels also, down here. 

God forces no one to Love Him, holds no one in bondage, nor punishes, non violent. We to  chose, believe or not believe, accept or not accept. We condem ourselves, we chose were we want to go, heaven or hell. Your choice, all have heard, there forth , all have no excuse either.

[Cranmer1549]

10:47 AM on 12/01/2010

What does any of this have to do with the Anglican Covenant?

[mggwa]

04:49 PM on 12/01/2010

I sort of glanced over it; it's amazing what you can stuff into 250 characters, but no, it appears to be O.T.

[DannyEVillage]

09:04 PM on 12/02/2010

Ah, Cranmer: I see you aren't familiar with Sunshine14. He/She appears regularly in religiously oriented threads with rambling blather of just this type. The writing is uniformly of this caliber and its author claims to know a lot about God's knowledge, thoughts and desires.

[Downix]

11:26 AM on 12/01/2010

Sadly, your tale does not fit in with biblical lore. Lucifer did not want a Kingdom, he refused to bow before man.

God banished him from his presence for this. And the only thing which holds him in place is the memory, the words echoing in his ear from the one Lucifer loves most, saying "Go to Hell".

[DannyEVillage]

09:07 PM on 12/02/2010

Actually, the tradition you're citing isn't "biblical lore" at all: no stories of Lucifer and his angels appears in the canonical literature; but Milton used a lot of extra-canonical material in his "popularized" telling of the story of what happened in the court of heaven to cause humankind to lose our Eden-state. It's from Milton that most Christians--at least, English-speaking Christians--who know anything about this tradition get their information.

[sunshine14]

08:25 AM on 12/01/2010

Homosexually came in the 19 and 20 century by Western Thinkers, was never a issue in Old Testament or laws ever given under Moses, nor ever Mentions under Christ himself. All sins separate us all from God. Not that in Moses time men did not have sex with men (they did) nor woman with woman (they did) but was not an issue in that world and time. I ask do men not have their hands on the bible also? The powers that be? In the world of Moses they stoned any woman or man who committed adultry. IN Christ time not so. 2 different worlds living at different times.  Moses gave also laws, for Woman also were know as abomination to God, if woman dressed like men, not so today. 

Woman also were to be seen and not heard in Moses times, or to be priest or leaders period.2 different worlds. So what in Moses world those woman went to hell, and today woman who do so now, go to heaven? Such foolishness. God is not a God of confusion, but a God of righteousness, who distributes equality rights to all and for all to share in. Bondage then, is no different then the bondage that others want to put on all. God gave free will to all, it is their God given right to choose for themselves, and no one has real authority over us, but God himself. What Christ came to teach us and take us all out of the few who seek imperial domination over others.

[mggwa]

04:50 PM on 12/01/2010

"Not that in Moses time men did not have sex with men (they did) nor woman with woman (they did) but was not an issue in that world and time."

Not for very long, at any rate.

[truthisneeded]

10:01 AM on 12/02/2010

F&F

[MilesToGo]

07:13 AM on 12/01/2010

AC Rowan Williams is a thoughtful, scholarly leader whose efforts at reconciliation should be supported by Episcopalians in America. Divisive issues surrounding gender and sexuality divert attention from the actual mission of the church, besides having no bearing, actually, when considering a mystical theology that reveals a God that is beyond gender and arcane sexual judgment.

[Cranmer1549]

10:11 AM on 12/01/2010

What a load of BS. Pope Rowan Cantuar seeks only to appease the African and Latin American provinces. He has no interest in reconciliation, only in shutting up the Communion's undesirable elements.

[TomFox]

10:31 AM on 12/01/2010

I think I have to agreed with Cranmer on this one...but your point is well taken that Williams is a throughtful, scholarly leader. I have no qualms at all with that characterization. But I do think that he, like Obama, is being steamrolled by Conservative elements within the Church.

Also liked your point about a "mystical theology that reveals a God that is beyond gender and arcane sexual judgment".

[mggwa]

04:51 PM on 12/01/2010

"besides having no bearing, actually, when considerin­g a mystical theology that reveals a God that is beyond gender and arcane sexual judgment."

Might that be restated, "We don't need no steenkin dogma?"

Or is it that you have some private, privileged knowledge about God that differs in small or large detail from anyone else; forming yet another version of Christianity?

[DannyEVillage]

09:13 PM on 12/02/2010

well...I don't know that dogma have been proven to be such a great idea. Consensus is great--but dogma?

[Jdaddy1951]

06:32 AM on 12/01/2010

Seems like a slow process. Maybe they're waiting for some of the opponents to die a natural death?

[Carroll27]

09:02 PM on 11/30/2010

From the third and fourth paragraph, it is apparent that this is a deal that will please no one.

[mggwa]

04:52 PM on 12/01/2010

Yay, the smartest comment I have seen all day.