Bravo, Bishop Iker.  You can’t get any clearer or simpler than that ringing endorsement.

Given the very strong emphasis on some of the most Protestant elements in the Anglican heritage by GAFCON’s leaders in Jerusalem, especially the stress on the continuing validity of the 39 Articles and the old Cranmerian 1662 BCP, I think this kind of unqualified support and unreserved alignment with the movement GAFCON represents is a very welcome development.  It’s a significant sign that ALL orthodox Anglicans are wanted and needed in this movement, including staunch Anglo-Catholics like +Iker and the conservative Diocese of Ft. Worth.

As I’ve pointed out on other threads, I think that the timing of the Final Communique is richly symbolic.  It was released on June 29, which is the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul (though this year, since that feast fell on Sunday, most Anglicans who observe it at all observed it today, on Monday).  And since Peter is the great hero of Catholics, and Paul the great hero of Protestants, I hope that the New Anglicanism that will result from this New Reformation will be faithful to the heritage of BOTH Peter and Paul.

And of course, +Jack Iker wasn’t the only American Anglo-Catholic bishop at GAFCON.  The bishops of Quincy, San Joaquin, Springfield, and Albany were also there.  This kind of cooperation by both the evangelical and catholic wings of Anglicanism in North America, now bolstered by a GLOBAL fellowship committed to forming a new province on this continent, is a very positive sign that bodes well for the future.

David Handy+

They best go home and take a look at their 1662 BCP’s.  Reservation of the sacrament is forbidden.  No statement on divorce; no statement on abortion. Why no position on women’s ordination?

For those waiting to see how the US Forward in Faith bishops would respond, my observation of this press release is that it graciously says everything that Bp Iker could possibly have said in affirmation, and, as he says, solidarity, without surrendering his own theological identity and boundaries.

NB that the Feast of Sts Peter and Paul was not recognized in the 1662 Prayer Book. St. Peter, yes, but not the two together. And what about the Reservation of the Blessed Sacrament? (Article XXV) Article XXXV (Of Homilies)? I assume that one need not say the Collect for the Queen (as instructed in the service of Holy Communion)—unless one lives in the UK? No anointing of the sick?

The 1662 and the 39… if I wished to confess a Calvinist faith, I’d do so—otherwise, I will remain a happy Episcopalian.

Hard to understand Ft. Worth, Albany, Quincey, et al. in bed with those who want to protestantize the Church.  Hope it’s just a cynical temporary alliance.  Whatever their case against TEC, they should be able to make it without the Jensenistas and their ilk.

Where do people get that the Articles forbid reservation of the Sacrament.
The article states that “by Christ’s ordinance the sacrament was not ...”
This has been discussed and discussed by various folks “above my pay grade” and the consensus was that it could be read as either “Christ told us not to do it” OR—-“Christ did not tell us we HAD TO DO IT but did not tell us we could not.”

Ugh!  The Accuser must really dislike what happened at GAFCon.  He is already at work trying to split us up: Catholic versus Protestant, WO.  #3 is spot on.  Let us not become the modern day Pharisees, trying to micromanage religious observance to the nth degree.  This is the beauty of the Jeruselam Statement: sticking to essentials.  To #2: I think that Rwanda via AMiA has shown the path forward with both WO and non-WO wings.  To all: The big US congregations that have put everything on the line for Jesus (Falls Church, Truro, Christ Church Plano) still use the 1979 Prayer Book!  I wrote to Christ Church and asked them about this.  Fr. David Rosenberry (Sp?) responded that the intent of the 1662 BCP is the issue. 

Our little start-up congregation here in the northwest uses our own adaptation of 1662 with some 1928 and a smidge of 1979 for our worship service.  We are all very faithful and walked away from a large thriving congregation and a beautiful building to meet in a school chapel area.  We have WO and non-WO members peacefully coexisting. 

US Anglicans are very spoiled.  My family and I lived in a Middle East country for 13 years.  Being a Christian there is technically a capital crime although not enforced.  You would be amazed at how trivial the exact edition of the BCP and status of denominations and women are when you have to worship behind closed doors with jail and deportation waiting in the wings.  We were thankful to have any prayer book and Bible.  Many of our overseas sisters and brothers live under similar circumstances.

Blessings to us all and Praise the Lord for GAFCon.

Yours in Christ whether or not we agree,
Northweat Bob

I still find all this horror from some so-called “Anglo Catholics” more than a bit odd.

Perhaps we need to be reminded that as a Church of England priest some two centuries ago, John Henry Newman (along with the rest of the Tractarians) celebrated the Lord’s Supper using the 1662 BCP, standing at the north end of the table, wearing cassock, surplice and tippet. Perhaps also it is time for some who have such horror of the 39 Articles (to which Newman and the other Tractarians assented) to read Tracts for the Times XC, “Remarks on certain passages in the Thirty-nine Articles” by Newman.

Sometimes, I think we get so wrapped up in dissecting the tiniest of details, that we forget all about what’s REALLY important in the life of the Church:  Our belief in God and practicing the Faith once delivered to the Saints.  We are so often like the single-minded professor who is so devoted to his field of expertise that he ignores everything else.