The Report of the Archbishops is short, and with less clarity than you or I might have desired. But it reflects a particular culture that abhors a "winner-takes-all" outcome, having fought civil and religious wars where such an outcome was only narrowly averted, and with much bloodshed. In that light, here are some important observations about the Archbishops' report that are, on balance, positive for ACNA:
1. The ACNA as an institution was not rejected, as TEC and its proxies no doubt desired. Our Anglican "bona fides" will be subject to review and discussion while the wounds remain fresh from the realignment here in North America. The Archbishops state that the concept of membership in the Anglican Communion is not straightforward (Paragraph 8). Within that declaration, they discuss the role of both the ACC and the assent of 2/3 of the Primates of the Churches already listed in the current schedule of membership as providing a basis for membership. But in contrast to previous statements by ++Canterbury and the Secretary of the Anglican Communion, there is no insistence here upon the ACNA submitting an application to the ACC or following its "schedule" as necessary steps for recognition. I believe this is a significant concession between the lines to those who have challenged the purported authority of the ACC to make such decisions, especially in light of actual precedent where it was recognition by the Primates that gave membership within the Communion.
Read it all.
Filed under: * Anglican - Episcopal Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) Anglican Provinces Church of England (CoE)
Posted January 23, 2012 at 11:21 am
To comment on this article: Go to Article View
The URL for this article is http://www.kendallharmon.net/t19/index.php/t19/article/40798/
|
2. Pageantmaster [KJS to Coventry] wrote:
By the way, £26,000 is equivalent to a pre-tax income of around £35,000 [$54,000]. With rank hypocrisy the bishops pay many of their clergy lower salaries than the benefit cap [£26,000] they have just voted against. Some days I sit and think. Other days I just sit!! January 24, 12:00 am | [comment link] |
|
3. MichaelA wrote:
Good to see that the nuts-and-bolts work of building up the dioceses of ACNA continues, despite whatever may emanate from Lambeth Palace or the ACC. Without this important but unspectacular work, it will be irrelevant whether ACNA was offered membership in the Communion or not. January 24, 4:13 am | [comment link] |
|
4. Pageantmaster [KJS to Coventry] wrote:
Comes the dawn, comes the hangover, and some of the press and commenter reaction over here: The Sun - ‘Benefits cap fury’ The Telegraph - ‘Peers reject ‘unjust ’ £26,000 cap on state benefits: Coalition ministers have insisted they will press ahead with a £26,000-per-household cap on benefits despite defeat inflicted in the Lords last night by Church of England bishops.’ Express - ‘Lords blow for the benefit cap as angry bishops revolt’ Daily Mail - ‘‘An insult to every working family:Labour, bishops and Lib Dem peers derail plan to cap benefits at ‘just’ £26,000 a year’ and this: “At long last we might get some commonsense in our bloated welfare system -but no thanks to Ashdown and bishops in big houses.” Independent - ‘Peers reject universal £26,000 cap on benefits ’ The pro-labour Daily Mirror and Guardian newspapers are pretty much ignoring the story, perhaps because the majority of labour voters are with the government on this one. and some of the comments:
And here is why it matters: Essentially, if we lose our Triple A credit rating, then our borrowing costs go up, and we follow Greece, Italy, France and others into a situation where these decisions will not be made by bishops, or us, and we will launch everyone into poverty, which with this level of debt will probably lead to us ending up like Greece. Fortunately, no thanks to CofE bishops, the government is remaining focused on trying to keep a tight fiscal discipline. No one understands why any family cannot live on the average income of £35,000 [pre tax] where the cap has been set. I don’t - and the claims of children being launched into poverty by it made by the bishops are just risible. As we have seen with the Communion, so with the country, there is no prudent leadership from CofE bishops and the Archbishop of Canterbury. #3 Michael A: I think that people care less what Canterbury [and ACO] says now than when the original vote took place in Synod. People are just marking time until RDW goes - then they may make a decision over whether the Canterbury connection with the Communion matters and is worth resucitating - not a comment on ACNA’s view, but across the board from what appears to be going on. Some days I sit and think. Other days I just sit!! January 24, 8:15 am | [comment link] |
|
5. Cennydd13 wrote:
As I said before on another blog, I’m in no hurry for my Church to officially join the Communion as long as the present archbishop and TEC are involved in leading it. I can wait, and in the meantime, we’ll go about our business of spreading Christ’s gospel. January 24, 11:45 am | [comment link] |
|
6. Katherine wrote:
Pageantmaster, it sounds like you need a British version of a Tea Party. After all, my ancestor who threw tea into the sea in Boston thought of himself as British, too. January 24, 5:28 pm | [comment link] |
|
7. Pageantmaster [KJS to Coventry] wrote:
#6 Katherine - cast tea into a saline solution? Oh, I don’t think I could do that - the thought makes me shudder. Are you sure your ancestor was British, or perhaps he drank hot chocolate instead? I think the really sad thing about yesterday’s actions by the bishops and reading the anger and ridicule of them in the papers today as out of touch, arrogant and daft is the message this sends people in Britain about who we are - they think we are a bunch of left wing privileged 60’s has beens with nothing worthwhile to say, and it helps our mission to the Britons not one jot. Quite the opposite. In the short term it will probably also mean losing our voice in the legislature. It will make no difference to the government proposal, for the Bishops’ amendment will just be over-ruled in the Commons. Some days I sit and think. Other days I just sit!! January 24, 8:35 pm | [comment link] |
|
8. Katherine wrote:
He was British, but I suppose he drank coffee or hot chocolate after the event. The colonists did get upset, as I’m sure you recall. At a recent ladies’ tea for our church I delighted our British member by serving real tea, putting the milk in the cup first, and using a tea strainer. As you point out, that’s the really sad part of this. The bishops’ warped political sense is getting in the way of preaching the Gospel to Britons, which ought to be their primary concern. January 24, 8:59 pm | [comment link] |
|
9. Pageantmaster [KJS to Coventry] wrote:
#8 Katherine - well it was a bit before my time, but I imagine they must have been very upset to put tea in the sea. I am very glad to hear though that people have not turned their back on tea and still enjoy it. I think you are right - the problem is that when scarsely a week goes by when we [or someone in particular] are held up to ridicule for our words and actions, then when we do have something really important to impart, people just won’t listen. You can see their point - we have no credibility, merely their sneering contempt, as you have read. They think we are out of touch, and they are probably right. Some days I sit and think. Other days I just sit!! January 24, 9:13 pm | [comment link] |
© 2013 Kendall S. Harmon. All rights reserved.
For original material from Titusonenine (such as articles and commentary by Dr. Harmon) permission to copy and distribute free of charge is granted, provided this notice, the logo, and the web site address are visible on all copies. For permission for use in for-profit publications, please email KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com
<< Return to Mobile view (headlines)

Well, the Druid has really done it this time - he has egged on the bishops to lead a revolt against the goverment in the House of Lords. The revolt based on the bishops’ amendment won.
The issue? The coalition seek to cap payments to people on welfare to a fixed sum, and the revolt amendment sought to exclude from that cap payments of child benefit.
It may sound incredible when you realise that the ‘cap’ the government were seeking to bring in is £26,000 [$40,000] a year, an income which puts those welfare recipients into the top 1% of earners in the country. I suppose when you are a nutty left-wing druid living in two palaces, £26,000 must seem like small beer, but it is considerably more than many in the caring professions such as nurses earn and bring up families on. Public opinion [76%] is in favor of the cap. The effect of the bishops’ amendment will be in some cases to double the entitlement of recipients to up to £50,000 [$78,000] a year.
There will be a backlash - it is unlikely that bishops will retain their seats in the reformed House of Lords proposals, and although the Druid will be long gone, the damage he is doing to the church and its mission will remain.
Does ACNA or anyone else for that matter really want to be in Communion with this useless prat? Watch our newspaper front pages tomorrow morning for more reaction.
Some days I sit and think. Other days I just sit!!
January 23, 11:15 pm | [comment link]