Leadership and the Anglican Communion
This was my immediate reflection on the Primates' statement terminal Thursday, published on the Premier Christianity blog.
Prior to the gathering this week of the Anglican Primates (heads of the 38 autonomous Anglican provinces) almost everyone predicted it would end in disaster. There was suspicion from the moment that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, appear the 'gathering' (not an official coming together) that it would end in tears. And but final calendar week all the speculation was about when it would fail, not if—Mon, Tuesday or Wednesday?
But contrary to all expectation, not simply have almost all the Primates stayed together (Stanley Ntagali, Archbishop of Uganda, did go out on Tuesday), they accept issued a clear statement, agreed past a two-thirds majority, which offers a form of rebuke to the Episcopal Church in the United States (TEC) for its acceptance of aforementioned-sexual activity wedlock.
It is worth noting advisedly what the statement, which was due to be released on Friday but was leaked a day early and so confirmed, does and does non say. On the one hand, it does not expel TEC from the Anglican Communion; there had been a previous motion asking TEC to voluntarily withdraw, but that was defeated by 20 votes to 15. At numerous points the statement emphasises the continuing relationship betwixt the Churches of the Communion, and the commitment of its leaders to proceed to work together. There is an emphasis on the need to preserve unity, despite differences of view on the nature of union. And there is an explicit delivery to ready a process to address the differences that take arisen. All of this has meant that the conservative group, GAFCON, accept expressed their unease at the effect. This does not address the thing in the style they would accept liked, and they (rightly) run into this every bit the start of a process, and not the finish. It does not yet settle the thing.
On the other mitt, it is difficult to see how the statement could exist any stronger in its censure of TEC without actually expelling them. For three years, until their next General Convention in 2018, they will not have a vote in Communion matters, will not part as ecumenical representatives of the Communion, nor be able to participate in its internal workings. As TEC'south Presiding Bishop, Michael Curry, told the other primates, the church volition find this hard to have.
So the argument has ended upward steering a very careful center course nigh which the 'extremes' are unhappy, but which has yet held everyone together.
How, exactly, did Justin Welby attain this?
Many will attribute it to political shrewdness. In his opening accost on Monday evening, Welby made much of his ain personal indebtedness to African Christianity (which he experienced in his gap year before going to Cambridge) for bringing him to living faith. And he has made apply of the same squad of negotiation facilitators who have supported the 'Shared Conversations' in the Church of England over the last 2 years. But in that location are two other factors that information technology would exist as well easy to ignore.
The first is Justin Welby'southward deep commitment to the importance of relationships. This is what he was referring to when he talked of 'reconciliation, fifty-fifty if we don't reach agreement' in interviews immediately earlier the gathering. This is what he meant when he talked of disunity beingness securely offensive to God. And this is what drove him, in his beginning yr in function, to personally visit every single ane of the primates in the other provinces. (By contrast, Rowan Williams visited few, and only went when invited.)
Information technology is this delivery to relationships that is evident in the statement. Though TEC volition non have a vote, information technology will 'have a vocalism'. Though trust has been badly damaged, the human relationship has not been ended.
The 2nd is the delivery to prayer. Welby fabricated this his number 1 commitment when he took upward part, and he has invited a customs of young people to spend a year at Lambeth to share in its life of prayer. These immature people were present in Canterbury to pray throughout the gathering, and I expect they will be very excited at the upshot.
What will be the result of this decision?
Unlike people volition certainly react in unlike ways. Those taking a 'liberal' view of same-sex relationships, wanting the Anglican Communion to follow the atomic number 82 of TEC, volition be frustrated, disappointed and aroused. They will be cross that no reference has been fabricated to the rights of gay men and women in many of the African countries where homosexuality is illegal. I think that is to fail to empathize what the meeting was nearly—non so much the immediate result of sexuality, simply the process past which this is debated and acted on in different parts of the communion. This question might well come again, and soon, in the planned discussion.
There will exist more than formal furnishings in other parts of the Communion. Both the Anglican Church of Canada and the Scottish Episcopal Church have strongly signalled that they desire to motion to recognise same-sex marriage. If they become ahead, it will exist in the knowledge that there will exist 'consequences' for the role they play in the Communion, that they will be moving abroad from the majority view.
Within the Church building of England, this is leap to requite encouragement to 'traditionalists' who would agree with the view of spousal relationship, as betwixt 1 man and one woman, that the statement affirms. And I doubtable that there will be a sense of growing respect for Justin Welby. He has managed, in three brusk years, to address effectively the two major bug which dogged the primacy of his predecessor, Rowan Williams—the move to accept women bishops in the Church of England and the divisions in the Communion on sexuality. Every bit one or two lone voices suggested, the next result could well be new life and vigour breathed into this global church.
And the wider media? If it isn't written off as yet another expression of the church's 'homophobia', I doubtable the whole thing will be greeted with mute incomprehension.
Follow me on Twitter @psephizo
Much of my work is done on a freelance basis. If you have valued this mail service, would yous consideraltruistic £1.20 a month to back up the production of this blog?
If y'all enjoyed this, do share it on social media (Facebook or Twitter) using the buttons on the left. Follow me on Twitter @psephizo. Like my page on Facebook.
Much of my piece of work is done on a freelance basis. If you have valued this postal service, y'all tin can brand a single or echo donation through PayPal:
Comments policy: Good comments that engage with the content of the post, and share in respectful debate, tin add real value. Seek first to sympathize, and then to exist understood. Make the about charitable construal of the views of others and seek to acquire from their perspectives. Don't view debate as a disharmonize to win; address the argument rather than tackling the person.
torrencewousbacan.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.psephizo.com/sexuality-2/leadership-and-the-anglican-communion/
Enviar um comentário for "Leadership and the Anglican Communion"