The Global Anglican Fellowship Conference (GAFCON) is the heir apparent to assume leadership of the Anglican Communion, said three bishops during an informal media briefing this afternoon at the Lambeth Conference.
Bishops Mark Lawrence of South Carolina and Keith Ackerman of Quincy were joined by Bishop Hector Zavala of Chile from the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone on the campus of the University of Kent, Canterbury, shortly before Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams was scheduled to deliver his final presidential address of the conference.
Bishop Lawrence criticized the existing Instruments of Communion of being too slow to adapt. “I witnessed a new birth last month [at GAFCON],” Bishop Lawrence said. “The Global South has come to its place of maturity. I don’t know how the two structures will work together in the future. Those who adapt the quickest will be the ones who win the day.”
Bishop Zavala challenged Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori to state clearly to the rest of the Communion the intentions of The Episcopal Church’s House of Bishops.
“I don’t want to put words in her mouth,” he said. Bishop Zavala said the current crisis is rooted in The Episcopal Church’s decision to disregard Resolution 1.10 from the 1998 Lambeth Conference and consecrate a partnered homosexual person as Bishop Coadjutor of New Hampshire.
“If there is no moratorium then the Communion will split,’ he said.
Bishop Ackerman encouraged the assembled media to pay careful attention to the words chosen in the final reflections document. He said he is concerned that people on both sides will be unwilling to wait 10 years for the approval of a proposed covenant and that individual bishops will attempt creative interpretations of the language used in the final reflections document.
“Pay careful attention to the words must, should and do for an indication of how strong the moratorium will be,” he said.
Minutes after the conclusion of the bishops' media briefing, the final reflections document was released. The language on the moratorium remains unchanged from the fourth draft which stated there was “widespread support for moratoria across the Communion,” but did not come to any decision.
Steve Waring
The Living Church magazine is now available online! New subscriptions are just $24.50 for one year. Current TLC subscribers can add the online edition for just $10 through June 2009. Get all your news faster than ever before.
2 Comments
The Presiding Bishop will never reveal the intentions while she is in damage control mode. To reveal any intentions would violate the commitment to the homosexual community supporting her; persona she is trying to protect. Not that it matters that the Presiding Bishop is offending the 98% of the population with her cause.
We shall see what final statement is made regarding Lambeth; then disect it. Do know the focus will be for "greenies" and the earth and not on Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ; The only way to salvation.
I don't think I understand what the author of the previous comment (Tom Dennis) is trying to convey. The article says that "Bishop Zavala challenged Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori to state clearly to the rest of the Communion the intentions of The Episcopal Church's House of Bishops." I'm not aware that any presiding bishop could ever state the intentions of the House of Bishops -- our Episcopal system does not give the primate such authority.
And is there any objective study that has determined "98% of the population" of the church is offended? The presiding bishop is elected by a majority of bishops, while deputies are elected by their diocesan conventions. I wouldn't hazard a guess how many members of the Episcopal Church are offended, but with our process for selecting our leaders, I believe a 98% offense rate is a bit unrealistic.
The final paragraph suggests it's a fact that the Episcopal Church is not focusing on "Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ; The only way to salvation." I think that's opinion, not fact. Would we all not be better off if we express opinions as such and not express them as objective fact. It seems to me our arguments are more about opinion and personal experience than about objective data -- I think it's a fact that do have different interpretations of scripture. I believe we always have.