If moratorium simply means a pause in a practice accepted by an autonomous provinces, why would anyone be surprised that those who oppose these practices would seek help outside their province!  Border Crossing is a request for help not an invasion or occupation by enemy.  It is a gracious pastoral response to a lack of one by Anglican Christians’ being put in distressed by their own province.  In other words, when one’s province refuses to act past then people seek help from other Anglicans.  There is no equivalency between the embracing of innovations not accepted by the Anglican Communion as a whole and another Province responding to a request from distressed Episcopalians.  I hope one day this fact is understood in both the EC and the AC.  The EC and the ACoC have embraced innovations that many in their province cannot in faith and conscience accept and it is being imposed on them in an unChristian and ungodly way.  They are in distress and requesting assistance and support from other Provinces in the Anglican Communion.  I can only say thank you to this faithful response and pray that it continues.

Re. #1.  Yes, praise God for the faithful Archbishops who have helped us stay in the Anglican fold!  Without them we would have moved on to some other fold.  I suposse that was TEC’s real objective: rid itsself of the Bible-believers, while expelling them completely from the Anglican fold.  A post-Christian church really is something else!

Did you see their sweet post-Christian touch in Binghamton, NY?  Kick the Christian people out of their sanctuary into the cold of winter.  Rip down their sign redirecting the homless to a warm meal in a nearby Catholic church.  No room at their inn for Christians with or without homes.  What totally adept PR manipulators!  They have assured the exclusion from their ranks, at least in Binghamton, of any Bible-belivers.  Way to go, TEC!

What is that clinking sound I hear?

Silver coins on the cold marble floor

At least thirty of them

As long as the relationships remain intact, all else is negotiable.

There was NO mention of Truth anywhere.

Game, set and match to TEC

I said before on this blog that if Katharine Jefferts Schori were present at this meeting, nothing would be done about the creation of the new province, and this proves it!  Now it’s up to the GAFCON primates to get the ball rolling…....with or WITHOUT the consent of Canterbury and the rest of the Communion.  We have been talking and talking for six years, and we want action.

One thing is certain:  The Anglican Church in North America IS organizing; the draft constitution and the first canons of the Church have been written and submitted for ratification, and once that takes place in June of this year, it will become an accomplished FACT.  Then let Canterbury and the Communion do what they will!

If the ACNA can get recognition by the +++ABC as “Anglican” or “within the communion” even if not a province - then TEC has lost its “exclusive franchise”.  TEC is doomed as a major denomination as it does a poor job of evangelism, is running off large numbers of its existing members annually, has poor demographics as most members are older and those who are not older fail to reproduce either in sufficent numbers for replacement or not at all for obvious reasons.
The ACNA at least has hope for a better tomorrow.

#4 Cennydd. There is a very significant paragraph in George Conger’s article published this morning, ‘Anglican Primates agree mediation programme’, Religious Intelligence site, 6 February 2009. It seems to be based on the Anglican TV interview, with Henry Orombi and Gregory Venables, which may be viewed here:

Bishop Venables and Archbishop Orombi stated that a legislative or legal solution at this phase of the debate would not resolve the splits. The question of recognizing a parallel province in North America was premature, they said, as the underlying theological differences had not been addressed. There was a visible church and an invisible church, they said. “Being an Anglican without knowing Jesus” conferred membership “in a club” and not in the true church, Archbishop Orombi said. Before a vote on a third province is taken “we have to see what happens to the Communion,” he said.

To me, as a ‘Communion Conservative’, this is very encouraging.

A very important quotation from the Anglican TV interview with Gregory Venables and Henry Orombi is the following from Henry Orombi (31 minutes into the interview), which was not included in George Conger’s article ‘Anglican Primates agree mediation programme’, Religious Intelligence site, 6 February 2009.

It was in response to George Conger’s question (a recognisable voice on the video):

So for those who say the Archbishop of Canterbury is unnecessary to be an Anglican, would you agree with that or disagree with that?

After Gregory Venables said:

I don’t think we can answer that at the present moment and I certainly would not want to answer it - I want to wait and see how things…

Henry Orombi chipped in and said:

...But I think the truth, though, is that the Archbishop of Canterbury is a main figure in the Anglican Communion - whether he defines it is another story, it would also depend on whoever. I think being an Anglican, without knowing Jesus personally, is a club membership. I would push it a little further - that being an Anglican is an expression, but to make that Anglicanism function for anybody, one has to know Christ. But, of course, Anglicanism as a Communion, recognises - and we recognise - Rowan as the head of the Communion.

If there had only been relationship councilors in the early Church.  We could have avoided all of those pesky ecumenical councils and the unpleasantness of having to tell some people that they were wrong.  And today we would all be on big happy Unitarian Universalist family.  Fortunately those mistakes are at last being rectified as the Anglican Communion is now a good 75% of the way there with TEC’s prophetic vision leading the way.  If TEC is not 100% Unitarian, I can’t tell the difference.

Under the mercy,
John

An Orthodox Christian

Graham, thanks very much for citing the link to the interview.  It was informative, and I think it offers hope.

How do we know how to tell “Who knows Jesus” and who does not.  And, should the Anglican Copmmunion be restricted to those who “know Jesus”?

#7 Dr Kings - thanks for engaging and highlighting this important interview.  I suppose it is curious the concentration on the office of Archbishop of Canterbury when even within the Church of England its head is its Supreme Governor.

But I take your point.  From what I heard in the rest of the interview the two Primates were excercised with the issue of what unity and integrity the Communion had without a Covenant before getting involved with recognition of new provinces.  Their starting point is that the Communion is broken and that is the first thing that needs to be fixed.  Only when that is done can other issues be addressed.

#11 Thanks, Pageantmaster.

The Queen is indeed the Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

In the Anglican Communion, the four instruments of unity, as is well known, are:

the Archbishop of Canterbury,
the Lambeth Conference,
the Primates’ Meeting, and
the Anglican Consultative Council.

All four of them have backed the whole of resolution Lambeth 1.10 - for ACC 13 in Nottingham, 2005, see here.

It is the crucial interdependence of these four which has been questioned by various people in the last year, but which was encouragingly, heartily and unanimously endorsed at the Primates’ Meeting in Alexandria.

The ‘Non-Canterbury Federal Conservative’ position did not receive support in the Primates’ Communique from Alexandria nor in the consequential briefings. This, I believe, together with the robustness of the communique, is a hargbinger of hope.

Oops, apologies - late at night. Last line, in my comment at #12, should be ‘harbinger’ rather than ‘hargbinger’.

#12 Thank you Dr Kings for your explanation - I will certainly join you in prayers for hope for the Communion.

I think hargbinger sounds much more interesting.

RE: “The ‘Non-Canterbury Federal Conservative’ position did not receive support in the Primates’ Communique from Alexandria nor in the consequential briefings.”

I’m not certain why the “Non-Canterbury Federal Conservative” position wanted or needed to receive support in the Anglican Communion.

The ACNA is doing okay, I think.

I’ll tell you what.  Fix the communion and I may come back.  Untill then I am moving on.  Right now I could care less what the AC does.

The Queen is indeed the Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

Can we petition Her Majesty for redress, and perhaps a new Archbishop of Canterbury? Or at least flood the mail room at Buckingham Palace and the Parliament (Office of the Prime Minister) with the same request?