A couple of interesting developments today from the Primates' Meeting. First of all, Katherine Jefferts-Schori was elected to the Standing Committee of the Primates Meeting, giving her a large amount of influence on decisions made between meetings and agenda setting for future meetings. Some on the right are claiming that the position was "bought" with the funding the American Church gives to the communion, but I rather think it has to do with JKS's amazing amount of grace and decorum. In any case, it puts the lid on any ideas that the Episcopal Church might be "Kicked Out" of the Anglican Communion at this meeting. It looks like the extreme right is in some amount of despair. Kendall is trying to do damage control.
Of longer lasting importance is the release of the draft from the Covenant Design Group, which you can find here. The document is one that the primates are asked to agree to in principle, understanding that some primates cannot commit their churches to anything without further approval (KJS for example.) I don't have a problem in general with a covenant. After all, we have a long document that describes exactly how we relate to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, but only two sentences that describe how we relate to the Anglican Communion.
Most of the draft covenant looks fine, but I have some issues with the powers the Primate's Meeting is to be accorded. The first indication are the contrasting descriptions of the Primates' Meeting and the Anglican Consultative Council.
"The Primates’ Meeting, presided over by the Archbishop of Canterbury, assembles for mutual support and counsel, monitors global developments and works in full collaboration in doctrinal, moral and pastoral matters that have Communion-wide implications.
The Anglican Consultative Council is a body representative of bishops, clergy and laity of the churches, which co-ordinates aspects of international Anglican ecumenical and mission work."
So the Primate's meeting works in doctrinal, moral and pastoral matters and the ACC works in ecumenical and mission work exclusively? This does not reflect the history of Anglican decision making. In the past, even before the Primates' Meeting came into existence, many sticky matters were taken to the ACC (most notably that of women's ordination.) While American Episcopalians think that bishops are important, I think it is very hard for us to think of them as the SOLE arbiters of moral and doctrinal matters. We believe the laity and other clergy should be invovled. A lot of this has to do with our history with the Episcopate.
In addition, a suggestion is made for future discernment:
Each church commits itself to seek the guidance of the Instruments of Communion, where there are matters in serious dispute among churches that cannot be resolved by mutual admonition and counsel:
1. by submitting the matter to the Primates Meeting
2. if the Primates believe that the matter is not one for which a common mind has been articulated, they will seek it with the other instruments and their councils
3. finally, on this basis, the Primates will offer guidance and direction.
I am pretty uncomfortable with this - the newest and least representative collegial instrument of unity being given both first and last say in doctrinal issues? If you add this in with the monkey business at the last ACC meeting suggesting more power be given to the primates, we see the instruments becoming less representative of anyone other than the highest echelons of the clergy. As an American Anglican, this makes me nervous. I would be much more happy with issues being taken to the joint standing committees of the Primates and the ACC, who could decide which body would better handle the question.
I hope this is a VERY rough draft....
David+
Technorati Tags: anglican, Anglican Communion, episcopal, Primates' Meeting, religion, Windsor Report
Comments