According to the Anglican Church of Canada’s Website, the Archbishop of Canterbury has responded to the Primate’s letter:
“Thank you very much for your letter about the situation in the Canadian Church; I thought it very helpful, clear and eirenic, and I hope it will be well received.
“I noted also the reference to the appeal of the Canadian Church to myself about interventions and irregular ordinations: as you will understand, I have no canonical authority to prevent these things, but I would simply repeat what was said in my Advent Letter, to the effect that I cannot support or sanction such actions, in line with what successive Lambeth Resolutions and Primates’ Communiques have declared, as well as the statements of my predecessor about irregular ordinations and the clear directions of the Windsor Report.
“I apologise for not responding sooner to this, but had had to focus in December on the preparation of the Advent Letter, which was intended to set out a perspective within which all such irregularities should be viewed.”
My take on the Advent letter can be found here. Suffice to say, this reply is indeed true to the Advent letter and is pretty much what I would have expected him to say.
Beyond the obvious point-scoring, I find it hard to get too worked-up about this one. With all due respect, after the comments following TECs New Orleans meeting and the Advent letter, what the current Archbishop of Canterbury can or cannot support or sanction seems to me to be becoming increasingly moot.
Actually in one way it is quite reassuring. There will be no discipline for anyone on either side, so you are pretty much free to do what you like and follow God’s plan for realignment of the Anglican Communion without interference from Canterbury. GAFCON is the new Canterbury.
If GAFCON is the new Canterbury, why do you even bother to heed or reference what Canterbury says?
If you are not happy with the Church (ACC), then please leave us alone and move on to your happy band of pilgrims. Take your toys and go home!
Mark, perhaps you could brush up on the definition of irony. When you say “us”, who are you speaking on behalf of? Do you heed what Canterbury says? Just some questions from a curious non-Anglican (who has a soft spot for Anglicanism).
Mark, I’d point you to the Blog rules tab at the top of the blog.
Can I quote you on that, Warren? (and I haven’t forgotten that I owe you a coffee…)
“eirenic” I had to look that up. Perhaps it is ++Rowan’s inability to enforce anything that is heart of GAFCON. Lambeth will pass resolutions but Primates will ignore them citing lack of authority from Canteberry or anyone else for that matter. Now if GAFCON has teeth and the will to enforce and develops a Covenant that the Primates MUST agree to remain in Communion, maybe. Does ++Fred and +KJS truly value their place in the Communion or is it just nice to have Anglican painted on the door?
As for “Us?” I was challanged in my diocese by that very query. I think I stated my position clearly but walked away not know how they envisioned “us”.
IT is interesting to note that nobody has commented on the fact that as of yesterday (January 21st) Bishop Harvey has not one clergy from the Eastern Diocese on his theological side!
Okay, with that being said, I am not gloating….in fact, I am feeling very sad at heart for the good Bishop, who had great intentions with this new Essentials group. As a former parishioner and supporter of Bishop Harvey, my heart aches for a Bishop who clearly has stood up for some part of orthodoxy, although not all.
It is with great sadness that I read of the overwhelming support for the present liberal “government in power” and even those whom Bishop Harvey had laid hands upon, blessed, nutured, and made Canons of the Cathedral now are so quick with the proverbial knife.
If only Bishop Harvey had carried his orthodoxy back far enough before liberalism ideas had formed, how much of an impact it would have had!
I fear that Bishop Harvey’s intentions have all been in vain. So, he will carry a few congregations to that place where Essentials feel called, but he really missed the larger picture.
How sad, how desperate for congregations not only from his home Diocese but indeed the whole AC!
Mark,
These people do not support orthodox beliefs…if you suggest anything outside that nasty little box called anti-gay, then you are edited or deleted….
Go ahead and make my day, delete me again…people were burnt at the stake for a whole lot more!
Michael, please read the blog rules and follow them. Last warning. ed
Comment removed by admin.
Michael, you do not seem to want to abide by the terms of this blog, hence your comments are now moderated. If you have something substantive or helpful to say, then please feel free and we will allow the comment. Otherwise, perhaps you will need to find somewhere else to comment.
michael: I see you’re still hanging around…me too.
The American people have a saying michael, “IT AIN’T OVER TILL THE FAT LADY SINGS” I’m quite sure you have heard that one before. Well, she hasn’t sung yet!!
Interesting that all the priests/priestesses signed on the dotted line. Isn’t it amazing how the “fear” of being ‘disciplined’ by the powers that be, (Bsp. Pitman, Archdeacon Peddle and Primate Fred) can impact on so many. That the ‘fear’ of the loss of licence; that the ‘fear’ of the loss of a “job”; that the fear of the loss of ‘pensions’; that the fear of the rules of the hierarcy of the church can cause so many to cave into the Orders placed on paper.
Bishop Pitman’s little speech about now being so much more known in Canada than he was before….I wonder, is he possible searching for the rungs of a ladder….no, couldn’t be possible…too close to retirement….. maybe one of his “followers” is having a very strong impact on what the good bishop Pitman does… maybe that “follower” has designs on being much more powerful than just a “Bishop” which surely is his immediate goal…
And, michael, YES, you are gloating….a tad premature I think.
I would think that now is a good time to ask for prayer for the clergy and others of the Diocese of Eastern Newfoundland and Labrador.
Dear Father in Heaven, we pray for the Clergy in the Diocese of Eastern Newfoundland and Labrador, that they will feel the touch of Your Holy Spirit as it brushes their faces Lord. We pray that they will come to know You in a much closer relationship and that they will learn that Your Word is much more powerful than the errant words of those who teach the rules of hierarchy and the “System”.
We pray that You will impart into each of them the Gifts of Your Holy Spirit and that they will in turn become courageous enough to turn away from the wickedness of following the teachings of a church gone astray. We pray for Bishop Pitman Lord, that He will come to know the strength that only You can give to him and that He will indeed start to follow Your Word instead of the false doctrine of a church that has gone wrong.
We pray also Lord, especially for all those parishioners who are being led in the wrong direction so subtly that they cannot see or hear it. We pray that You, O Lord will give them eyes to see and ears to hear Your Word and to turn from their ways.
These things we pray in the Name of Your Son, Our Saviour, Jesus Christ, Amen.
Michael, me thinks ’tis time to be a man – start your own blog, let people know what you are for instead of only what you are against, and show us how a “fair and tolerant” comment policy would work. I am being presumptuous in saying this, but the good folks who run this blog might provide a link to your blog in consideration of all the time and effort you have expended in making a contribution here. I would visit your blog so long as you kept it interesting.
Thank you for your prayer Drumroll. I have been saddened by the unchristian nature of some of the comments.
I am saddened also by the ABC’s response; he is NOT prepared to require protection for those who have been unable to have orthodox new clergy ordained for the past five years but neither is he prepared to allow others to provide it. GAFCON seems the only choice if I wish to be part of a truly “inclusive ” church.
Fear is an apt description. I know priests sympathetic to ANiC who have parishes, rectories and pensions. Fear?, you bet. Supporting the new Bishop without question? On paper, thats easy.
There’s a hole in the bucket dear Lisa, dear Lisa, there’s a hole in the bucket, dear Lisa a hole. And how do I fix it? dear Lisa, dear Lisa
I think once the leading parishes vote to join, and other priests see that there is in fact support available for them, things will change.
I offer an analogy from the secular world of unions. 10% are involved in the activities and another 10% show an interest. The remaining 80% are usually ambivilant. Their silence is not indicative of consent. A significant number of parishoners go to Sunday Service and for them that is the extent of their involvement in the parish. If the conservative movement is guilty of anything it is that we failed to see the slow adjustment of our values. What is most appaling that I know of one parish where a vestry member who resigned in protest was told he was not welcome. But what the ACC will eventually learn is that parishoner=$$. Programs will suffer, good works will not be done and liberal sermons will be preached to empty pews.
The Lord welcomes sinners to His table (upon presentation of appropriate authorization)
Interesting interpretation of Bishop Pitman’s January 21st chat with his Diocesan Clergy.
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2008/jan/08012204.html
Bishop Pitman wrote, “I would expect any clergy involved in the network and working to the establishment of a parallel jurisdiction to the Anglican Church of Canada would do the honourable thing and resign their positions, relinquishing their licences to exercise ordained ministry in this church as their leader has done.”
Upon reflection I see the actions of +Pitman as those of a deeply insecure man. If he thinks he is going to regain/restore loyalty in this manner then he his very mistaken. I would think that, if anything, he’s lost the respect of his clergy rather than gained it. Obedience born out of fear is very different from obedience born out of love and respect. But maybe he doesn’t know that, or even care. Who would want pastoral care from such a person?
Who does he think he’s kidding? Maybe just himself. Of course the clergy can reaffirm their oaths, at that moment. It would be interesting to know how many of the clergy are even Essentials supporters let alone Federation or Network or even break away Network, and whether that changed as a result of the action of +Pitman. Let +Pitman be aware that this is not ’till death do us part’.
I would expect a little more wisdom and genuine pastoral responsibility from those elected into such offices. Sadly, it seems that the new generation +Pitman and ++Hiltz must have missed that class at theological college, if it was even taught!
I have served under Bishops who exercised ministries of exceptional wisdom, kindness and leadership and by the same token received the love and support of their clergy and people which in turn made for a very happy and holy diocese. That’s ‘kingdom’ ministry, not what we are seeing now!
“Actually in one way it is quite reassuring. There will be no discipline for anyone on either side, so you are pretty much free to do what you like and follow God’s plan for realignment of the Anglican Communion without interference from Canterbury. GAFCON is the new Canterbury.”
Dearest sister in Christ Pauline,
GAFCON is not the new Canterbury. See my blogpost here for more on this. This is a fairly rampant misconception about the conference that is potentially very damaging.
From the above mentioned post (not directed at you personally, dearest sister):
GAFCON is not about replacing Lambeth any more than the recent Mere Anglicanism conference was in the United States. To make the argument that it is exhibits a flagrant disregard for the facts and is, quite simply, dishonest. It is not an alternative.
Warm regards,
Mike