This page will be an archive of content from August 2007 to January 2012. Please visit Covenant’s thoroughly redesigned home at covenant.livingchurch.org and join the conversation.
View the original post

The report addresses three questions and provides answers.  Briefly here are the questions along with the answers:

First Question:

What is the range of relationship with other Christian churches that is possible for the Church of England?

Basic answer is it is for General Synod to decide (see para. 6).

Second Question:

How does a particular local Church become accepted as part of the Anglican Communion?

Answer is not straightforward (para. 8).  Two things to think about.  First is that traditionally, those churches who bishops get invited to Lambeth Conference are part of Anglican Communion (para. 9).  Second is membership in the ACC which requires assent of 2/3 of primates of churches already members (para. 10)

Third Question:

In what circumstances can the orders of another Church be recognised and accepted by the Church of England so that someone ordained in that church can be given archiepiscopal authorisation for ministry here?

Since ACNA clergy are ordained by the historic episcopate, they may be authorized to minister in the CofE, but are not automatically so authorized (para. 13).  Will be decided on a case by case basis by the Archbishops of York and Canterbury (para. 14).

The report then asks in para. 15:

Where then do matters currently stand concerning ACNA on each of these three issues, namely relations with the Church of England, relations with the Anglican Communion and the ability of ACNA clergy to be authorised to minister in the Church of England?

But answers to these questions are not really given.  Instead, the Archbishops call for the North American situation not to be inflamed (isn’t that horse out of the barn already??) (para. 17); call for an “open-ended engagement with ACNA on the part of the Church of England and the Communion, while recognising that the outcome is unlikely to be clear for some time yet” (para. 18); state that the CofE wants to be “in communion” with both ACoC and TEC (para. 19) and somewhat awkwardly state that the CofD affirms “the desire of ACNA to remain in some sense within the Anglican family” (para. 19).

Finally, para. 20 calls for apparent continuing dialogue between the CofE and ACNA on specified issues:

Among issues that will need to be explored in direct discussions between the Church of England and ACNA are the canonical situation of the latter, its relationship to other Churches of the Communion outside North America and its attitude towards existing Anglican ecumenical agreements.

All in all, a very interesting report that appears to fairly outline what needs to be addressed as a relationship between the CofE and ACNA moves forward.

The ongoing argument about whether the Internet is a boon or a bust to civilization usually centers on the Web’s abundance. With so much data and so many voices, we each have knowledge formerly hard-won by decades of specialization. With some new fact or temptation perpetually beckoning, we may be the superficial avatars of an A.D.D. culture.

David Weinberger, one of the earliest and most perceptive analysts of the Internet, thinks we are looking at the wrong thing. It is not the content itself, but the structure of the Internet, that is the important thing. At least, as far as the destruction of a millennia-long human project is concerned.

Rest the rest.
View the original post

Episcopalians, she said this summer while competing for the bishop job, have lost focus of the core missions of a church, such as worship and evangelizing. Their spiritual foundations are weak. Their churches don’t demand enough commitment from members. She compared the denomination to the interstate bridge that collapsed in her home town of Minneapolis in 2007.

The whole article is here.

This seems like a common occurrence. A progressive has vision for growing the Episcopal church, and has had some success, but they have borrowed heavily from their Evangelical past, especially powerful conversion experiences. When they call others into the same activism they now practice because of their past experiences, those who follow can easily get burned-out, not having the same true spiritual resources to draw on.

As a lonely teen coping with her parents’ divorce, she joined a fundamentalist community and was baptized in a preacher’s swimming pool. She said the experience remains “the foundation of my understanding of Christian community.”

“I wanted that, I wanted that kind of connection,” she said. “The idea that Jesus would want to come into my heart — that was life-changing for me.”

It sure looks like she now wants the Christian community but now based on something other than the life-changing nature of Jesus “coming into your heart.”

If you do a straight line analysis of ASA, ASA will be 0 (zero) in approximately 30 years.

The Anglican Bishop of Sarawak and Brunei, the Right Revd Datuk Bolly Lapok, has been elected the fourth Archbishop of the Province of South East Asia.

Bolly was elected during the Extraordinary Provincial Synod in Kota Kinabalu on Thursday.

He will become the province’s fourth Archbishop next year, taking over from the Most Revd Dr John Chew, who is Bishop of Singapore.

View the original post

Title IV.17 is entitled “Of Proceedings for Bishops.” It addresses terminology applicable to Title IV.16, but the canons make clear that the process to be followed for abandonment is markedly different from that to be followed with other kinds of infractions.
View the original post

Two things have haunted me since 9/11. The first is the pain, the grief, the lives lost and families devastated, the sheer barbaric ingenuity of evil. The scar in our humanity is still unhealed. The second is our failure to understand what Osama bin Laden was saying about the West. We did not hear the message then. I’m not sure we hear it now.
After the shock and grief subsided, two theories began to be heard. The first was that this was an event of epoch-changing magnitude. The terms of international politics had been transformed. The Cold War was over. Another war had begun. This time the enemy was not the Soviet Union and communism. It was radical, political Islam.
The second was the opposite. 9/11 was terrifying and terrible but it changed nothing because acts of terror never do. Terrorist campaigns have been aimed at other countries. Britain suffered similarly from the IRA in the 1970s. The most important thing is not to overreact. Terror may bring dividends in local conflicts but it never succeeds in its larger political aims.

There is something to be said for both theories. But there is a third, no less consequential. Why did al-Qaeda attack America? Because it believed that it could. Because it thought the US was a power past its prime, no longer as lean and hungry as it believed it was.

Read the rest.
View the original post