Resolutions from the Meeting of the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Sydney, held in the Chapter House of St Andrew’s Cathedral from 6.00pm to 10.00pm, Monday 25th June.
1. Consecration of Canon Bill Atwood
Canon Atwood is well known to and respected by many diocesan leaders in Sydney. He was a friend to many during the episcopate of Archbishop Harry Goodhew; he has maintained these relationships since the election of Archbishop Peter Jensen and is especially highly regarded and respected by Archbishop Jensen.
The Standing Committee voted as follows:
“Standing Committee requests the Diocesan Secretary to inform the Rev Canon Dr Bill Atwood of the deep pleasure of the Diocese of Sydney at the news of the announcement by Archbishop Nzimbi, Primate of Kenya, of the forthcoming consecration of Dr Atwood as Suffragan Bishop of All Saints’ Cathedral Diocese, Nairobi on 30 August 2007. We assure Dr Atwood of our continuing prayer for his ministry as he supports Kenyan clergy and congregations in North America.”
2. Invitations to Lambeth.
Being aware that Archbishop Peter Jensen, Archbishop of Sydney, and his five Regional Bishops - The Rt Rev Robert Forsyth, Bishop of South Sydney; The Rt Rev Glenn Davies, Bishop of North Sydney; The Rt Rev Peter Tasker, Bishop of Liverpool; The Rt Rev Ivan Lee, Bishop of Western Sydney; and The Rt Rev Alan Stewart, Bishop of Wollongong -had all received personal invitations from Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury to attend the Lambeth Conference to be held in 2008;
and also being aware that Archbishop Williams had requested a reply to the invitation by 23 July, 2007,
Standing Committee engaged in a lengthy discussion about Lambeth 2008 with the Archbishop and Bishops of the Diocese.
Archbishop Jensen commenced the discussion by commenting on the present situation of the Anglican Communion as he observed it and the implications of the invitation to most Bishops in the Episcopal Church, including those who had agreed to or participated in the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire, but excluding Bishop Gene Robinson and also Bishop Martyn Minns.
In response to the discussion, the Standing Committee resolved the following advice to the Archbishop and Bishops:
“Standing notes that disregarding the clear requests of many bishops, the Archbishop of Canterbury has issued invitations to attend the Lambeth Conference in 2008 to the bishops of the Episcopal Church of the USA who agreed to and/or participated in the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire.
“Standing Committee therefore -
(a) respectfully requests the Archbishop of this diocese to communicate to the Archbishop of Canterbury our dissatisfaction at the attempt to maintain union with the unrepentant while continuing to refuse fellowship to faithful and orthodox Anglicans such as the Church of England in South Africa,
(b) respectfully requests the Archbishop and bishops of this diocese not to accept the invitation to Lambeth without making public in protest, speech and liturgical action, both prior to and at Lambeth, our diocese’s principled objection to the continued participation of those whose actions have expressed a departure from the clear teaching of scripture, and who have consequently excluded orthodox Anglicans from their fellowship, and
(c) respectfully requests the Archbishop and bishops of this diocese to approach other orthodox bishops of the communion with the purpose of meeting in England at the time of the Lambeth Conference for Christian fellowship and the planning of joint action within the Anglican Communion to contend for the faith of the Apostles once delivered to the saints.”
For Comment on these resolutions,
Contact: Margaret Rodgers
mrodgers@sydney.anglican.asn.au
(W) 61 2 9265 1507
(H) 61 2 9560 9801
(Mobile) 0411 692 499
26 June 2007 at 3:32 pm
Here’s the gist:
(b) respectfully requests the Archbishop and bishops of this diocese not to accept the invitation to Lambeth <b>
Wow! That is real action. Sydney joins Nigeria, Uganda, and all the rest in <b>following CHRIST—- they will not attend Lambeth! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! But the next but is even better:
(c) respectfully requests the Archbishop and bishops of this diocese to approach other orthodox bishops of the communion with the purpose of meeting… at the time of the Lambeth Conference for .. the planning of joint action”
They will not attend Lambeth 2008 with the Pagans! The will attend another meeting instead with the Christians, to build a new and true Church!
Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah!
Lagos 2008 here we come!
27 June 2007 at 2:51 am
Now that the church in Australia has stated its stand. How sayeth ECUSA and ACC? It was said that it was the poor Africans who were against the ordination of a Gay bishop. Australia should take the lead and show others the way to Christ. Time has come for ECUSA and ACC to be left alone to do their thing.
The word of God is supreme - yesterday, today and forever.
FOR ONE ADAM GOD CREATED ONE EVE
27 June 2007 at 4:49 pm
I am writing in response to the suggestion that the resolutions of the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Sydney on Lambeth represent the views of the Anglican Church in Australia.
The decision in Sydney it is only one view, if very important, in the Australian Anglican Church.
Like many other Australian Anglicans, I deplore the actions of The Episcopal Church in rejecting what I understand to be immutable Biblical principles.
At the same time, I deplore the many unChristian comments made against The Episcopal Church many, if not most, of whose bishops, clergy and members are as orthodox Christians as will be found anywhere. Most parishes and members will ignore the ‘top guns’ and just get on with the tasks of Christian service in their local situations.
Setting up a separate consultative process to Lambeth is, logically, setting up a separate Anglican Communion. That seems self-defeating in the longer term. If the values of the TEC and some others are so objectionable it hardly seems sensible to abandon Lambeth and give them free reign.
One unhappy strand (in my opinion) of the current attempts to resolve disagreements within the Anglican Communion is the idea of an episcopally agreed covenant. Are lay Christians and ordained clergy of the Anglican tradition supposed to blindly submit to a value system more redolent of Rome or Constantinople than of Anglicanism. Pursuit of this will, I am sure, simply accelerate lay and clergy departures to other denominations.
Perhaps the greatest absurdity in all this is the thoroughly evil diversion of energy into schism but that is the inevitable result of pursuing the present unhappy course.
28 June 2007 at 1:46 am
I applaud the decision of the Diocese of Sydney and the Churches in the Global South that are in agreement in not attending Lambeth 2008. The comments made about TEC (USA) and the ACC are in line with The Word and are in keeping with what the Real Anglican Communion is all about.
I implore the Global South and the Southern Cone to keep applying the proper pressure not only to TEC and ACC but also to Canterbury. In my opinion, if Canterbury continues to support TEC and ACC, then perhaps it is time for the Anglican Communion Worldwide to take the action that is now apparently need…..
To Mr. Ian Welch, while I admire your thinking, I cannot agree with you….The TEC and the ACC are going down a road which will take all that stay loyal to them to a place that is talked of in Scripture and I don’t mean Heaven. The unfortunate thing about all of this is that most members (Laity) of these two (TEC & ACC) just do not know what is being done to them. Why? Because they have been so far removed from Scriptural Teaching for many decades that the evil one has infiltrated to the very core of both the TEC and the ACC. I have acquaintances that are promoting the evil of liberalism within the ACC and it makes me very upset that they would do this knowing that they are promoting the work of the devil.
Ian, I attend an Anglican Parish in Canada and am only holding on by the very tip of the fingers to the Church that I love. The challenge we in North America have is that most of the mainline churches are going the same direction as the TEC and the ACC. We need Episcopal Oversight from the Global South or The Southern Cone if we are indeed to remain within the Anglican Communion.
04 July 2007 at 6:36 am
The Episcopal Church many, if not most, of whose bishops, clergy and members are as orthodox Christians as will be found anywhere
Ian - that is simply and utterly untrue. The vast majority of ECUSA bishops and priests, and a solid majority of laypeople are simply not Christian by any accepted definition
And that is what this whole realignment is about.
By having anything at all to do with such people - in ECUSA, in Canada or Australia or NZ or especially in the CoE (and given that John Stott is now backing the alternative communion in England) - we do not bear witness to the Gospel, rather we bear witness to Satan and to the road that brings to damnation.
That is why Lagos 2008 is not some possible alternative: it is the only way to keep the global majority of Anglicans who are Christians!
07 July 2007 at 8:09 am
It does not help anyone in the current difficult debate to rubbish other people by statements such as ‘simply not Christian by any accepted definition.’
The Anglican Mission in America, for example, includes dozens of TEC parishes and three dioceses are, presumably, included in that exclusion.
As we say in Australia, ‘Fair Go, mate!’ It is fine to engage in debate, heated as it may become, but it is another thing altogether to simply write off any who do not choose to follow our particular path.
It is not so long ago that Anglican evangelicals (however defined) and Anglo-Catholics did not talk to each other and indeed, treated the other as enemies. Today, we find that what we share is far greater than what divides, and neither group is inclined to write off the other as being less Christian or worse still, unChristian.
The Lord Jesus said that ‘in his house there are many rooms’ and we ought to keep that injunction in mind before we allow our own views, values and prejudices to overwhelm us.
07 July 2007 at 8:58 am
Ian: Your statement follows:
“It does not help anyone in the current difficult debate to rubbish other people by statements such as ‘simply not Christian by any accepted definition.”
It certainly is correct that we shouldn’t rubbish others, however, I have not read anything in the Holy Scriptures that says those rooms are reserved for unrepentant sinners.
Ian, TEC and ACC are walking outside of the Communion and have no intention of going back. Why would one continue to talk about it any further, I think that Lagos 2008 is the only viable answer and not only that, those in North America that want to remain in the Anglican Communion have the opportunity to do so through established organizations in both the USA and Canada.
We, as Evangelicals or whatever you wish to call us, are not required to remain in communion with those who wish to follow False Teaching and False Doctrine. I prefer to think that I shall follow the Sons of Zadok rather than belong to a Church that should have the name “ICHABOD” on its’ doors.
I do not intend to “rubbish” those who remain in TEC or ACC. They are welcome to be part of Essentials Canada or the ANiC OR the similar organizations in the USA INDEED, already, in the USA, they can leave TEC and become part of the Anglican Church in Kenya or Rwanda if they choose and not have to move to the Global South to do so because the Global South has valiantly and correctly come to them.
24 July 2007 at 2:34 pm
Hello,Sinner, Gerry and Ian, Where can I find the details of the alternative communion that John Stott is backing in England? Where can i find the details of the plans for Lagos 2008 and the “realignment” to which is being so often refered? Thanks for any suggestions or details. In Him, Jim Seagram
24 July 2007 at 4:17 pm
I am not sure where Gerry got his information about John Stott. I am certain that there is no hint in anything from Mr Stott about a breakaway church in England.
The ‘realignment’ refers to a vague concept of a primates or diocesan bishops meeting, the ‘Lagos’ gathering—a possible meeting around the time of Lambeth, rather than a definite alternative that would signal a departure from the Anglican Communion as a group symbolised by the primacy of Canterbury. At the moment, the vague references are to a meeting in the UK rather than Lagos.
The legal dimension involved in the current debate is enormous and far from minor in a church grounded in the rule of law, rather than the transient opinions of today. In Australia, and I think elsewhere, Anglican churches are incorporated under Acts of Parliament. The Australian State governments would be extremely reluctant to enact new legislation as they have already indicated in less serious matters.
The history of breakaway movements or schismatics in church history does not suggest that those who choose to leave will prosper. Many lay-people will join other denominations, as they are already doing in droves, particularly towards the pentecostal movement.
The idea of a church embodying some kind of spiritual purity ignores both original sin and historical reality. I think Billy Graham had a famous quote on the subject of the perfect church. Consider the REC in the US and its fellow Free CofE in Englan for relatively recent examples.
Anglican Schismatics should not ignore the post-Reformation history of the established Church in England or the conflicts of American Christianity in the 19th and 20th centuries.
The alliance of the ‘orthodox’ as against the ‘liberals’ papers over the deep cracks in theology within Anglicanism. While ‘evangelicals’ and ‘catholics’ are broadly aligned for the moment, that may well disappear in the future versions of Anglicanism. There is also the evidence of cracks within the evangelical movement in England. All in all, the breakup of the Anglican Communion may well herald the end of Anglicanism as it has evolved over the past hundred years or so.
I think it was Gamaliel who mentioned patience to see if an issue was of God or not. Perhaps someone can recall the exact NT text.
Once we go down the tragic road of division there is unlikely to be any way back. This debate is not going to be settled any time soon, I suspect.
Ian