AAC: Archbishop of Canterbury Says Sexuality Debate Will Not Be Reopened at Lambeth 2008

Source: AAC and more comments on it at T19

In a pastoral letter to Anglican Communion Primates issued last night, the Archbishop of Canterbury “set out his thinking” on Lambeth Conference 2008. Noting the “lack of enthusiasm for revisiting” decisions on sexuality made at Lambeth 1998, Archbishop Williams made clear that reopening the debate on sexuality, specifically Lambeth Resolution 1.10, would be neither proper nor useful. He also reiterated the fact that Lambeth 1.10 represents the mind of the Communion on sexuality, despite “bitter controversy” surrounding the issue.

This letter is consistent with recent comments from Archbishop Williams regarding the crisis within the Communion. In news reports during the last few weeks, he has expressed “deep unease” with the nomination as bishop of two partnered homosexuals in the Diocese of California, called on the Episcopal Church USA (ECUSA) to uphold a moratorium on the consecration of non-celibate homosexuals, and reiterated that the mind of the Communion on matters of sexuality cannot be changed by one Province.

Such statements by Archbishop Williams serve to ratchet up pressure on the Episcopal Church for General Convention 2006. With Lambeth 1.10 virtually deemed non-negotiable by the Archbishop of Canterbury for Lambeth 2008, the Episcopal Church is left with an even more strongly defined choice. The Church must abandon its agenda to revise Scripture and 2,000 years of teaching and practice on human sexuality, and it must affirm foundational tenets of Christian faith as well as uphold Lambeth 1.10. Any other course represents a decision to walk apart.

“In the midst of our current crisis, Archbishop Williams is sending a significant and positive message to the Communion,” said the Rev. Canon David C. Anderson, President and CEO of the American Anglican Council (AAC). “Anxiety is high nationally and internationally, with a particular focus on General Convention 2006 and Lambeth 2008. It is important for the Archbishop of Canterbury to allay fears that the upcoming Lambeth Conference would be used as a platform to undermine Resolution 1.10, and to reinforce the Communion’s call for the Episcopal Church to make a definitive choice. The heat has been turned up for ECUSA.”

Lambeth 1.10 and the Anglican Consultative Council 2005 called for listening “to the experiences of homosexual persons,” and in his letter, Archbishop Williams reported that Provinces will offer reflections on their experience and discernment regarding sexuality at Lambeth 2008. Such reports, however, will be framed by the central focus of Resolution 1.10, which upholds marriage and deems homosexuality as incompatible with Scripture.

“In its presentation to the Anglican Consultative Council, the Episcopal Church made clear its intent to misuse the listening process as a means to coerce Lambeth 2008 and push for a recall of Resolution 1.10,” Canon Anderson noted. “In his pastoral letter, Archbishop Williams has forestalled those plans; however, because much of the testimony of currently gay and lesbian individuals speaks to the inability to change their orientation, in order to be credible, any listening process must include voices of former homosexuals whose testimonies speak to God’s power to heal and transform individuals—that is, to in fact change.”

“Archbishop Williams has sent a hopeful message that Lambeth 2008 will stand firm in upholding apostolic faith and practice, but potentially explosive issues must still be addressed,” continued Canon Anderson. “Will General Convention 2006 repent, repudiate actions of General Convention 2003, and embrace Anglican doctrine? If General Convention does not clearly and definitively choose Anglican orthodoxy, will Lambeth make the hard decisions necessary to preserve the Communion? Will V. Gene Robinson, Bishop of New Hampshire, and the Episcopal bishops who personally laid hands upon and consecrated him in defiance of the Communion be invited to Lambeth 2008? These questions are critical to the survival of Anglicanism.”

    Comments & Responses

  1. “If General Convention (of ECUSA) does not clearly and definitively choose Anglican orthodoxy, will Lambeth make the hard decisions necessary to preserve the Communion? Will V. Gene Robinson, Bishop of New Hampshire, and the Episcopal bishops who personally laid hands upon and consecrated him in defiance of the Communion be invited to Lambeth 2008? These questions are critical to the survival of Anglicanism.”

    I believe that the General Convention 2006 of ECUSA must address the actions of bishops and clergy in ECUSA that break the ‘unity’ and ‘discipline’ of the church that pays for their professional services. As a member of ECUSA, I would be pleased to see all paid professional christian members of the Anglican Network leave ECUSA and join what ever cult they find pleasure in serving. ECUSA bishops and clergy are paid for their services by the members of ECUSA and should be removed from office if they fail to do the job they are paid to perform. That is the very least we can expect from paid professional christians.

    Posted by  on  03/10  at  11:47 AM

  2. How do you define “cult”. I can only assume that you meant it as hostile and derogatory term.

    Posted by  on  03/10  at  10:40 PM

  3. Well mccabe I see you’re still at it. Your comments are quite humorous. Thanks for the laughs.

    What the ECUSA needs is a complete purging of all the perveyors of false doctrine and to get rid of the 1979 revision of the BCP. If this doesn’t happen then the ECUSA will become nothing more than a cult. And a Godless one at that.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/11  at  11:59 PM

  4. Mick,

    My brother in Christ, it is my pleasure to serve you by bring joy to you life. If ECUSA is forced to ‘walk’ alone by our loving sisters and brothers in the Anglican Communion then that is just fine with me. We are, after all, the first English colonial church to establish ourselves as an independent Anglican church outside of England. We were a chruch born as an orphan abandoned by our spiritual mother.

    I will joyfully vote against sending any money outside of our province in the future. Your paid professional christians (wearing such very lovely drag by the way) are doing such a great job at working the streets in the Unitied States that I am sure they will not need ECUSA financial support in the future. They will have earned it the good old fashion way. Isn’t the old song ‘Love for Sale’? Or is it ‘She works hard for her money’? You know how confused I am about the real goals of the Global South working as The Anglican Network.

    Posted by  on  03/12  at  09:03 AM

  5. The original Episcopal Church was formed on the heels of the Revolutionary war. At the time the Church distanced itself because England was the enemy and The crown controlled the Church. The Anglican Communion did not exist at that time.

    It has little to do with todays problems. I think that a break would be a bad thing for the ECUSA. The decay evidenced in the number of Churches breaking away shows that.

    Are you one of those who doesn’t care what is destroyed as long as you get your way? Some of the Bishops seem to be showing that sort of thought.The false doctrine, going againt the laws of God, needs to be removed. If not the ECUSA can change their name to the Church of Secular Humanism.

    Back at ya.

    Posted by  on  03/12  at  09:29 AM

  6. Marlin,

    You missed the point, ECUSA has bishops that were consecrated by the Church of Scotland when the Church of England refused to consecrated bishops in the United States. Like I said: ‘We were a church born as an orphan abandoned by our spiritual mother.’

    The churches that you see as breaking away are in fact a distinct minority in ECUSA. Those churches, along with any other assets associated with them, will ultimately be rewarded by the proper civil authorities to the rightful owners of the assets.

    The ‘decay’ you mentioned is acutually more like an opportunistic disease infecting our beloved church. The origin of the disease is found in a warmer climate outside of our own provincial boundaries.

    The ECUSA will always be the ECUSA. It will be ECUSA alone or in some reformed version of an Anglican Communion.

    I don’t know if the wicked ‘Church of the West’ will always see itself as worthy enough to remain in full communion with the pure ‘Church of the Global South’. It may be that the two groups decide to have lunch every now and then and go their own way.

    Has it ever occurred to the ‘Church of the Global South’ that there is no real value in ECUSA remaining in communion with it? You seem to believe that communion is a desireable thing and that your approval is required by us. The ‘Church of the West’ has more important things to do then attempting to placate such an insatiable entity. ECUSA certainly has more then enough need right here in our own little province to spend its’ nasty money satisfying.

    Thank God, we are still moving forward towards full partnership with our true sisters and brothers in Christ found in The Evangelical Lutheran Church of America.

    Posted by  on  03/12  at  12:41 PM

  7. mccabe

    Don’t be so sure of yourself. 4 churches in Calif. and Penn. have already been to court and been allowed to retain their churches and church property. While you may be right on your point of history is still remains that the communion came at a much later time.

    What I’ve been seeing in most revisionists is a selfish desire to have every thing their own way no mater who or what it hurts.

    A severing of the ties with the world church would hurt all. and if the ECUSA walks apart then more churches will brake off and even if the name is maintained the historic church will cease to exist. No longer Anglican and no longer Episcopal. If that happens I shall remain with my ancestrial ties and remain Anglican.

    If the church votes to walk apart I also look to see not only individual parishes but entire diocese break away. this is where your viewpoint will lead.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/12  at  08:44 PM

  8. Mick,

    Isn’t it a pity that we have brought ourselves to this wasteland. Four churches get to keep some of their property and others become impoverished defending theirs.

    All I can see in my heart is the burning cities of Europe during the almost 300 years of religious warfare that Europeans inflicted on themselves in the name of God. ECUSA is being driven away from the communion. Christ suffers on the cross by at all of our actions in this conflict. There are no clean hands in this business. You and I stand there handing the nails to the executioner.

    Posted by  on  03/12  at  09:29 PM

  9. mccabe

    Wow........something we can agree on. Although, undoubtedly from differing points of view.

    It is a pity indeed.

    Yesterday after noon my Church had a discussion meeting on the Windsor Reprot. The Theologin from the Southern Ohio Diocese led the discussion. He, I think, was placed in that position only to gain the co-chair of the upcomming convention. With what he said about himself, including having blessed a same sex relationship, marked him as one of false prophet Griswold’s flunkies. When I confronted him with the fact that 36 churches in the New Hampshire area alone have broken away and realigned with the Global South he was avasive and didn’t realy want to adress the matter. He also left out the most critical part of the Windsor Report which was the closing comments where the Anglican Communion gave what I consider an ultamatim to either recant the decisions ow “Walk alone”.

    I thank the lord for Bishops like Robert Duncan of the Pitsburg diocese that are going to make a united front against the false doctrine pervading the Church today.

    God will have his way no mater what any of our views are. His law will prevail.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/13  at  11:43 PM

  10. Mick aka Marlin,

    Do we agree that we are both handing the nails to the executioner at Christ’s crucifixion?

    The discussions on the Windsor reports are suppose to be part of a listening and learning experience. They are not suppose to be an opportunity of attacking the leader of the discussion. Is that christian love in action on your part?

    I just checked Anglican Communion Network’s - New England list of churches in New Hampshire diocese and found only two parishes listed as contact points. What is your source for the imagined ‘36 churches’ breaking away from the Bishop they elected. In fact, I counted only 48 churhes in the whole diocese listed in its’ own diocesan directory. There seems to be some misinformation floating around in the BLOG world.

    Which nail should we use next, brother? This really rusty one?

    From the Book of Common Prayer ECUSA:

    Litany of Penitence

    The Celebrant and People together, all kneeling

    Most holy and merciful Father:
    We confess to you and to one another, and to the whole communion of saints in heaven and on earth,
    that we have sinned by our own fault in thought, word, and deed; by what we have done, and by what we have left undone.

    The Celebrant continues

    We have not loved you with our whole heart, and mind, and strength. We have not loved our neighbors as ourselves. We have not forgiven others, as we have been forgiven. Have mercy on us, Lord.

    We have been deaf to your call to serve, as Christ served us. We have not been true to the mind of Christ. We have grieved your Holy Spirit. Have mercy on us, Lord.

    We confess to you, Lord, all our past unfaithfulness: the pride, hypocrisy, and impatience of our lives, We confess to you, Lord.

    Posted by  on  03/14  at  07:50 AM

  11. mccabe

    I think we could be friends even though being at each others throats over doctrine. Mickey is a childhood nickname, hense Mick.

    My opinion of Frank Griswold being a false prophet stands and is even firmer after the Bishops discussion at my church this sunday last. He is the Southern Ohio Diocese theologin. Befor that he had a post in Wasington DC. He also admited to having blessed a same sex relationship. Other things he said firmly made him one of Griswold’s people. Ih is the co-chairman of the upcomming conference. I posed a stament (question) that Article 7 of the Articles of Religeon of the Episcopal Church bound us to the moral commandments God gave us through Moses. His responce had enough double talk and spin to do a polition proud. In the middle of it, and I hope others there caught it, he, in the light of modern secular views, said the the Bible, God’s word written, was no longer valid. Having sumarily dismissed God’s word written sealed my view that Frank Griswold and all those who hold these views are the false prophets that Jesus warned of in his prophesys of the end times. If the doctrine goes against God’s law that doctrine is false and if it’s not from God then It’s from Satan.

    On the 36 churches, perhaps I should have said the New England area instead of the New Hampshire area. The website is http://www.virtueonline.org . And the number they gave was 3 dozens (36). While I haven’t verifyed every thing there, there are cleargy associated with the site and comments hear and there from the posters seems to indicate there are clergy posting as well.

    I don’t and can’t believe that all in the clergy hold to the same views as Griswolds croud or that they are even in the majority. They howeve are in a position to do a great deal of dammage that could take years to heal if ever. But then again there is nothing that God cannot do and I can’t believe that he has abandoned us. Ultamatly it is all in God’s hands. I don’t think he will allow any who go against his word or law to prevail.

    I would like to add on the matter above that the Bishop and I respectfully agreed to disagree.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/14  at  10:08 PM

  12. Mick,

    I know that it is a fashionable idea in the Anglican Network and Global South to believe that it is a minority that has taken over ECUSA. A minority that is twisting ECUSA to fulfill some wicked satanic agenda. However, the numbers simply do not support that view point.

    In the last four plus decades, the vast majority of delegates (Bishops, clerics and laity) to the General Conventions of ECUSA have approved of the changes being made in the church for almost half of a century now. WE wanted the new Prayer Book. We have it. We wanted the ordination of women. We have them. We wanted woman Bishops. We have them. We wanted the an open acceptance of gays in the church. We have them. We are not a minority. We have been in the majority for decades. We will continue to obey the one law given to us by Christ as a new commandment. A commandment replacing all others:

    Love one another as I have loved you!

    From the Book of Common Prayer ECUSA:

    “Then the Bishop says

    Almighty God, we thank you that by the death and
    resurrection of your Son Jesus Christ you have overcome sin and brought us to yourself, and that by the sealing of your Holy Spirit you have bound us to your service. Renew in these your servants the covenant you made with them at their Baptism. Send them forth in the power of that Spirit to perform the service you set before them; through Jesus Christ your Son our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever.  Amen.”

    Posted by  on  03/14  at  11:48 PM

  13. Mccabe, You are right that your side has the majority of active delegates. I agree with you that they have been approved according to ECUSA Canon Law.

    But when you say “We have been in the majority for decades”, I would then question it. It all depends on whether you are looking at ECUSA in isolation or at worldwide Anglicanism.

    How wide are your horizons? Do you look at the USA, or at the world?

    Does ECUSA want to be influenced by all the other Anglicans in the world, or does it want to be a fully independent province? Walk with the rest, or walk alone?

    If you feel led to walk alone, you can. If you want to walk with the majority of Anglicans, you will need to change to match the rest of us.

    Posted by  on  03/15  at  12:25 AM

  14. mccabe

    I respectfully dissagree.

    The flood of people leaving the Church when the 1979 rev. was put into effect says other wise. This is not just a “fashionable idea”. The others posting on this site and other sites says otherwise. There are many of the clergy who are also opposed.

    The scripture on the ordination of women is one of those that is open to debate but on homosexuality we are in the relm of God’s law. To have a bishop of the church disreguard the bible as a whole because it won’t uphold secular values cannot be tolerated. It also shows just how insiduosly this doctrine has been infiltrating the church. To me the 1979 rev of the BCP just promotes this and is a weakning of the church as a whole.

    I won’t be able to convince you, but having been apart for such a long time and having returned to a church I hardly recognise give me a distinct viewpoint. I can compair the old with the new because I wasn’t part of the propaganda of change.

    One more point. If the doctrine violates God’s law or ignores it it is false doctrine. Those who teach this doctrine are false prophets (teacher). Those who follow this false doctrine are being misled.

    The church needs to be purged of this and by virtue of promoting the split in the church the 1979 rev. of the BCP should be gotten rid of. Then perhaps the church can start to heal.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/15  at  12:47 AM

  15. William Greetings

    I have both views. The church in the USA and it’s relationship to the Communion.

    The episode described above was personal experience.

    That Bishop Frank Wade, co-chairman for the upcomming conference, is one of Griswold’s people is of no doubt. He as much as said so himself. Having a Bishop discount the validity of the Bible makes me question his right to lead. I consider it a disgrace that he could even imply such a thing. It does however put Griswold and his flunkeys in their true light.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/15  at  01:04 AM

  16. Mccabe, You also have been relying on human rules (ECUSA canon law) like a good pharisee. Think about it. Following the rules of men where it suits you, rather than the word of God. I hope that the Lord Jesus opens your eyes and shows you that you should love and welcome everyone, for you this would have to include all the people supporting the Network, which you keep on attacking in a rather unloving way. Jesus welcomed sinners and pharisees alike, but he did not simply accept them as they were, he told people not to sin again.

    Posted by  on  03/15  at  08:01 PM

  17. William

    We could all pray for him.

    He seems to want to gloss over the fact that (1) Jesus preformed miracles and (2) he fufilled biblical prophacy. Also the fact that (from the books refered to as the prophets) The higherarchy in the synagogs were corrupt and God was reviled by their sacrifice. The Jews of the time had broken the covnant with God. God by giving us his only begotten son established a new covnant to include all peoples. Jew and Gentile alike. Our beloved Church today is at the same point the Jewish religeon was in the time of Christ. We are riddled with, in terms Jesus in his prophesies of the end times, flase prophets.

    Listining to one of Griswold’s flunkies with my own ears dismiss the Bible unilaterly sealed my opinion. These are those we’ve trusted to interpret God’s word written to bring the truth of God’s word to the people of the Church. How can they do that if they no longer believe in the written word of God. I still feel that the Church needs to be purged of these unbelivers before more dammage is done.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/15  at  08:38 PM

  18. A Pharisee believes that The Law of Moses is the standard to judge all things.

    I am a citizen of a nation that uses Civil Law to control corporations. ECUSA is a non-profit corporation chartered by the civil authorities and subject to civil law. Canon Law is a part of the ECUSA’s corporate bylaws. Our Canon Law is simply required by civil procedures and the laws regarding corporate governance.

    Canon Law is not a manifestation of divine law or authority. Our Bishops and other paid staff officers are really just paid employees of a not for profit corporation. It is the civil authorities that will determine the outcome of this internal dispute. In cases of Civil Law, I am clearly a law and order man.

    It is the fundamentalist that harm the Body of Christ in ECUSA. They preach a form of idolatry that is clearly offensive to the majority of God’s people in ECUSA. They may leave ECUSA at any time and preach their book worship in their own churches. They may govern themselves, as they will, in their own non-profit corporation.

    Posted by  on  03/15  at  10:54 PM

  19. mccabe

    While you may call us fundamentalists the plane facts are that over the last 40 years there has been a concerted effort to push the Church toward secularism.

    Over and above that to have a Bishop, and the diocese theologen, stand up in front of every one and deny the validity of the Bible in the light of modern secular views makes me question his fitness for the position. How can, may I ask, a man responsible for the interpretion of God’s word to obtain the truth therein do his job when he doesn’t believe in the book he is interpreting?

    This is not the work of God but of Satan. False Prophet Griswold and his flunkies are not doing God’s work but Satan’s.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/15  at  11:50 PM

  20. My brother in Christ,

    I do not believe for one second that Christ Jesus ever said: ‘Take up your cross and follow me”.

    If he had actually said that to his followers then why did the disciples hide when he was arrested and executed? They hide in fear and could not undertand why Christ Jesus had been crucified. They thought he was going to be crowned King when he entered Jerursalem the ‘killer of prophets’!

    The church has always had problems with the internal differences and contradictions found in the Gospels. Tell me which of the Resurrections stories is the ‘true’ version? Why are the disciples confused about the Resurrection and the Ascension?  They appear to be the same event to people like Paul for example. Why did Mary go with her other sons go to capture Jesus when they thought He was insane? Christ Jesus said at that event: “I have no mother”.

    Satan the ‘father of lies and a man killer from the start’ deceives people today into believing that the Bible is the only word of God. Christ Jesus is the only true Word Of God. He gave us only an oral tradition of faith!!! Explain why he picked oral tradition over written rules. If you get confused, please notice how much of his teaching is devoted to denouncing the written laws of his people and their beliefs.

    Posted by  on  03/16  at  01:14 AM

  21. mccabe

    You were there and heard it firsthand then.

    You seem to be missing a couple of historically documented facts (and not from the Bible). First: in the 1st cent. and before when a man like Jesus, with the following he had, appeared scribes of the day followed and took down every word he said word for word. The same was done with John the Baptist.

    The words Brother in Christ comming from a person with your pagan satanistic views is blasphemy.

    You have showen me that the cource the Episcopal is wrong just because it allowes views like yours. The legacy of Flase Prophet Griswold.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/16  at  01:35 AM

  22. mccabe, mccabe, mccabe

    Have you even read the Gospal of Luke. The answer to your misbelief of him is in the opning words of the Gospal.

    You have spouted much history that is in error. I don’t know your source but it is suspect. Try some of the shows on Christian TV where the ones teaching have made an indepth study of just these issues. Zola Levit, a christian with a strong Jewish background, is one of these.

    As to proof of the validity of the Bible there are those who deny our saviour’s birth because they say that Ceasar Agustus never issued the command that the whole world be taxed. The non-biblical proof of this is that the decree and 2 other such decrees are carved in the stone of Augustus’ crypt. One of those was at the time of our Lord and Saviour’s birth.

    The source of your historical information is suspect. It does however point out the fact that the doctrine of todays Episcopal Church is suspect. I know not how old you are (14????) but I do know that historicaly you are getting some bad information.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/16  at  09:20 PM

  23. Mccabe, If you question whether Jesus actually said this statement or that, why do you quote Jesus’s new commandment at us? Shouldn’t that be as suspect (to you) as anything else in the Gospels that Jesus said to have said? But you have, from your mails, taken that particular quote at face value.

    Your brother in Christ,
    William.

    Posted by  on  03/16  at  10:27 PM

  24. William

    One thing you have to learn about mccabe, if you already haven’t, is that he talks out of both sides of his mouth. You can, for the most part ignore him. I myself think he makes my point about the modern church quite admirably.

    Just laugh him off.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/16  at  11:43 PM

  25. Mick, Thanks for your advice. However, I hope that Mccabe has learnt something from our exchanges. After all, what use is a listening process when no-one learns anything?

    We are all sinners, and all need Jesus.

    Bill.

    Posted by  on  03/17  at  12:40 AM

  26. William

    I doubt it.

    mccabe

    Luke 1:3-4 “3. It having seemed good to me also,having had perfict understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus.
    4. That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.”

    Luke says in these verses that he was there from the start.

    From what do you take your opinion. This is from the standard KJ Bible.

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/17  at  01:35 AM

  27. Luke 1: 1-4

    “Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses, and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of things you have been taught.”

    He was using the accounts ‘handed down to us’ and summarized (investigate everything) by Luke for Theophilus to study. Note it is a private text written from Luke for Theophilus to use in his private study of the faith.

    Posted by  on  03/17  at  06:29 AM

  28. mccabe

    I owe you an apology. I have referred to other sources about Luke and found he was a deciple who followed Paul in part of his journies. The fact still remains that he was alive when our savour walked the earth and he had direct contact with those who were there. He is also the most literate of the ones who wrote the Gospals.

    That said we press onward.

    You condem the written word of God. You twist the meaning of verse. How can you clame to be Christian when you obviously rejet the written word of God?

    Mick

    Posted by  on  03/17  at  09:04 PM
    29. Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Next entry: Special committee on Church and Communion named by ECUSA

Previous entry: A Letter From Archbishop Rowan Williams to the Primates of the Anglican Communion, 8th March 2006

<< Back to main