wfn.org | ACNS - Archbishop of Canterbury responds to GAFCON statement

[Worldwide Faith News <wfn@igc.org>]

Archbishop of Canterbury responds to GAFCON statement

Posted On : June 30, 2008 5:04 PM | Posted By : Webmaster
ACNS: http://www.anglicancommunion.org/acns/news.cfm/2008/6/30/ACNS4417
Related Categories: Lambeth

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has responded to the
final declaration of the Global Anglican Future Conference with the
following statement:

The Final Statement from the GAFCON meeting in Jordan and Jerusalem
contains much that is positive and encouraging about the priorities of
those who met for prayer and pilgrimage in the last week. The 'tenets of
orthodoxy' spelled out in the document will be acceptable to and shared
by the vast majority of Anglicans in every province, even if there may
be differences of emphasis and perspective on some issues. I agree that
the Communion needs to be united in its commitments on these matters,
and I have no doubt that the Lambeth Conference will wish to affirm all
these positive aspects of GAFCON's deliberations. Despite the claims of
some, the conviction of the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as Lord and God
and the absolute imperative of evangelism are not in dispute in the
common life of the Communion

However, GAFCON's proposals for the way ahead are problematic in all
sorts of ways, and I urge those who have outlined these to think very
carefully about the risks entailed.

A 'Primates' Council' which consists only of a self-selected group from
among the Primates of the Communion will not pass the test of legitimacy
for all in the Communion. And any claim to be free to operate across
provincial boundaries is fraught with difficulties, both theological and
practical - theological because of our historic commitments to mutual
recognition of ministries in the Communion, practical because of the
obvious strain of responsibly exercising episcopal or primatial
authority across enormous geographical and cultural divides.

Two questions arise at once about what has been proposed. By what
authority are Primates deemed acceptable or unacceptable members of any
new primatial council? And how is effective discipline to be maintained
in a situation of overlapping and competing jurisdictions?

No-one should for a moment impute selfish or malicious motives to those
who have offered pastoral oversight to congregations in other provinces;
these actions, however we judge them, arise from pastoral and spiritual
concern. But one question has repeatedly been raised which is now
becoming very serious: how is a bishop or primate in another continent
able to discriminate effectively between a genuine crisis of pastoral
relationship and theological integrity, and a situation where there are
underlying non-theological motivations at work? We have seen instances
of intervention in dioceses whose leadership is unquestionably orthodox
simply because of local difficulties of a personal and administrative
nature. We have also seen instances of clergy disciplined for scandalous
behaviour in one jurisdiction accepted in another, apparently without
due process. Some other Christian churches have unhappy experience of
this problem and it needs to be addressed honestly.

It is not enough to dismiss the existing structures of the Communion. If
they are not working effectively, the challenge is to renew them rather
than to improvise solutions that may seem to be effective for some in
the short term but will continue to create more problems than they
solve. This challenge is one of the most significant focuses for the
forthcoming Lambeth Conference. One of its major stated aims is to
restore and deepen confidence in our Anglican identity. And this task
will require all who care as deeply as the authors of the statement say
they do about the future of Anglicanism to play their part.

The language of 'colonialism' has been freely used of existing patterns.
No-one is likely to look back with complacency to the colonial legacy.
But emerging from the legacy of colonialism must mean a new co-operation
of equals, not a simple reversal of power. If those who speak for GAFCON
are willing to share in a genuine renewal of all our patterns of
reflection and decision-making in the Communion, they are welcome,
especially in the shaping of an effective Covenant for our future
together.

I believe that it is wrong to assume we are now so far apart that all
those outside the GAFCON network are simply proclaiming another gospel.
This is not the case; it is not the experience of millions of faithful
and biblically focused Anglicans in every province. What is true is
that, on all sides of our controversies, slogans, misrepresentations and
caricatures abound. And they need to be challenged in the name of the
respect and patience we owe to each other in Jesus Christ.

I have in the past quoted to some in the Communion who would call
themselves radical the words of the Apostle in I Cor.11.33: 'wait for
one another'. I would say the same to those in whose name this statement
has been issued. An impatience at all costs to clear the Lord's field of
the weeds that may appear among the shoots of true life (Matt.13.29)
will put at risk our clarity and effectiveness in communicating just
those evangelical and catholic truths which the GAFCON statement
presents.

> (c) Rowan Williams

___________________________________________________________________
ACNSlist, published by Anglican Communion News Service, London, is
distributed to more than 8,000 journalists and other readers around
the world.

For subscription INFORMATION please go to:

http://www.anglicancommunion.org/acns/acnslist.cfm