Is it dead yet?

There has been very little significant news about the proposed Anglican Covenant for some time. Already three years have passed since the dioceses of the Church of England failed to vote in favour of considering the Covenant at their General Synod. At the time it was suggested that this did not mean the Church of England had said no to the Covenant, and that it still could say yes. Technically, this is quite true. The Church of England didn't say no because it didn't consider the question. And it hasn't taken advantage of the intervening three years to revisit the Covenant.

Now, the most recent news is that the Episcopal Church has similarly not taken advantage of an opportunity to say something about the Covenant - be it no or maybe, though decidedly not yes. At its recent General Convention, the Episcopal Church was offered two equal but opposite resolutions. Both resolutions proposed to affirm the membership in and common identity of the Anglican Communion. But one said that this was described in the first three sections of the Covenant, and the other said that the Covenant did not adequately describe membership and common identity of the Anglican Communion. Neither resolution proposed to adopt or reject the Covenant definitively, merely to comment on the value of the first three sections in describing the membership and common identity of the Anglican Communion. Both resolutions were clear in valuing membership in the Communion, and the common identity (however described) of Anglicanism. And both proposed to communicate the Episcopal Church's appreciation for the Communion to the next meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council. In the end, however, the Convention chose to say all the positive things about the Communion without reference to the Covenant. Not yes, not no, not maybe, not even an unenthusiastic "meh".

Two things are clear from this outcome. First, the Episcopal Church values its membership in the Anglican Communion and appreciates its shared Anglican Identity. Second, it does not apparently see the need to bring the Covenant into that conversation.

Like the Church of England, the Episcopal Church has no apparent energy to discuss the project. Both churches seem to have moved on. The only thing missing now is a formal statement from some credible body (such as the Anglican Consultative Council) that the project is officially dead.

In the absence of such a pronouncement,  the Covenant process has ground to a halt, sitting on a long-forgotten list of things to do, gathering dust.

Andrew Brown: The Anglican Communion is Dead

 Andrew Brown’s Guardian blog offers a provocatively titled essay, “It started as a split over gay clergy. But now the Anglican Communion is dead.” That title is a bit of an exaggeration; Brown’s point is better captured in his opening sentence: “What, you gave a schism and nobody came?” He argues that people in the Church of England—laypeople, anyway—are quite indifferent to GAFCON and the Anglican Mission in England.

I was particularly interested in this paragraph:

They [conservatives] feel they are part of the global, “orthodox” mainstream of Christianity. But almost the only decisive act of Rowan Williams’ time in office was the rejection, by a clear majority of committed churchgoers, of his “covenant”–a plan to bind the Church of England into the structures of the rest of the Anglican Communion. No one here wants to be told what to do by the Church of Nigeria, however many Anglicans there are there and however sincerely they seem to hate gay people.

From my vantage point in the United States, I cannot be sure that Brown is reading public opinion correctly, but I suspect he is. I certainly hope he is.

Status Update on the Covenant

“South Park” Malcolm
from Simple Massing Priest blog

News of the Anglican Covenant has been scarce for quite some time. The Anglican world has instead largely been focused on various goings on in the Church of England. The English church now has a new Archbishop of Canterbury, has the potential to consecrate gay (but celibate) bishops but not women bishops (of any sort), and has shown itself to be out-of-touch with the larger society on the matter of marriage equality. No one seems to be talking about the Anglican Covenant.

The Rev. Malcolm French, the No Anglican Covenant Coalition moderator, noting that he has not written anything about the Covenant since he blogged from the General Convention of The Episcopal Church last summer, has now published a post on his blog titled “Time for the new broom to sweep clean.” In it, Malcolm offers an evaluation of where the Covenant stands in January 2013. He stops short of asking Justin Welby, the new Archbishop of Canterbury, to sign the death certificate (or, perhaps, death warrant) of the Covenant, but he observes that the Covenant “staggers on like some dessicated zombie or reflection-free nosferatu.”

You can read Malcolm’s post here.
 

Church of England Final Voting Stats

Today the final two dioceses in the Church of England voted on the proposed Anglican Covenant. Newcastle (against) and York (for) complete the voting on a reference to the dioceses.

In total, 18 of the 44 dioceses voted for the Covenant, and 26 against. In order for a resolution to adopt the Covenant to return to the General Synod in July, a majority (23) of the dioceses would have needed to vote for it. That became mathematically impossible a few weeks ago after over 22 dioceses had voted against the Covenant.

In all, 3588 people voted in the 44 diocesan synods, including 94 bishops, 1584 clergy and 1910 laity. The bishops' votes actually did not count toward the results, but were nevertheless recorded. In order for the resolution to be adopted by any given diocesan synod, it was required to be adopted by a majority among both the clergy and the laity. Failure to secure a majority in either of those houses defeated the resolution.

If we include the bishops, a total of 49.25% of all synod members voted for the Covenant, 46.29% against, and 4.46% abstained.

Excluding the bishops, 48.43% voted for, 47.14% against, and 4.44% abstained.

Amongst the bishops, 79.79% voted for, 14.89% against and 5.32% abstained.

Amongst clergy, 46.65% voted for, 49.49% against and 3.85% abstained.

Amongst laity, 49.90% voted for, 45.19% against and 4.92% abstained.

Looking at voting by order and diocese, the bishops voted for the Covenant in 37 dioceses and against in 7.

Clergy voted for the Covenant in 18 dioceses and against in 26.

Laity voted for in 22 dioceses and against in 22.

It is clear overall that the Covenant was unable to secure majority support amongst either the clergy or the laity. The bishops voted overwhelmingly for the Covenant, although their votes did not count toward the result.

 

New Voting Statistics

This week London (Thursday) and Manchester (today) voted on the proposed Anglican Covenant. Both dioceses voted against adopting the Covenant, bringing the total in the Church of England to 15 dioceses for and 25 against. Four more dioceses will meet in April to have their say, but since last week the result has been clear: the Covenant cannot come back to the General Synod for adoption, at least until 2015.

With London's and Manchester's figures, we now have:

Bishops: 77.4% for, 16.7% against, 6.0% abstentions
Clergy: 45.0% for, 50.9% against, 4.1% abstentions
Laity: 48.1% for, 47.0% against, 4.9% abstentions
 
Overall: 47.5% for, 48.0% against, 4.5% abstentions
Overall (clergy and laity only): 46.7% for, 48.8% against, 4.5% abstentions

Total figures now show more against than for overall, even including bishops. Also of interest is that the number of abstentions has been steadily dropping. Overall opposition has been strongest among the clergy. But clearly the membership of the Church of England, assuming that they are accurately reflected by the diocesan synods, do not want to adopt the Anglican Covenant.

We take a break from the horse race until after Easter.

More Voting Statistics

Six more dioceses in the Church of England voted today on the proposed Anglican Covenant.

There was some confusion in the tally of Oxford's votes, which has made the update of the statistics difficult, because I had to decide how to include them. There is no doubt about the end result in Oxford: the Covenant proposal was defeated in the House of Clergy. (Oxford, recall, is the home of the Yes to the Covenant campaign.) In the end, I chose to average the numbers, rounding. So, reported numbers for Oxford are:

Clergy: 14/15 for, 36/38 against, 2 abstentions
Laity: 32/35 for, 24/29 against, 3 abstentions.

I have included:

Clergy: 15 for, 37 against, 2 abstentions
Laity: 34 for, 27 against, 3 abstentions.

Bearing that in mind, total voting statistics now stand at:

Bishops: 79.5% for, 14.1% against, 6.4% abstentions
Clergy: 45.7% for, 50.1% against, 4.3% abstentions
Laity: 48.6% for, 46.4% against, 5.0% abstentions

Overall: 48.1% for, 47.2% against, 4.7% abstentions
Overall (clergy and laity only): 47.3% for, 48.1% against, 4.7% abstentions

The overwhelming support for the Covenant by the bishops pushes the total to a slim plurality of support for it, but when their votes are excluded from the counting (as their votes don't actually count in the diocesan totals) the reverse is true. Except amongst the bishops, it is clear that the members of the diocesan synods that have voted to date are almost exactly evenly divided as to whether the Covenant ought to be adopted by the Church of England, though there is a significant margin and a majority against adoption amongst the clergy.

Where the votes actually count, of the 38 dioceses voting to date, 23 have voted against the Covenant and 15 for. Thus, regardless how the remaining 6 dioceses vote, a majority of the 44 dioceses has already voted against the Covenant, and its consideration cannot return to the General Synod during the current quinquennium.

We will continue to monitor voting in the Church of England, and in the other Provinces as results become available.

Covenant rejected by Church of England

NEWS RELEASE
MARCH 24, 2012
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

COALITION STATEMENT ON THE DEFEAT OF THE PROPOSED ANGLICAN COVENANT IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
LONDON – No Anglican Covenant Coalition Moderator, the Revd Dr Lesley Crawley, has issued the following statement on the defeat of the proposed Anglican Communion Covenant in the Church of England.

“With today’s results from the dioceses of Oxford and Lincoln, the proposed Anglican Covenant is now dead in the water in the Church of England. This also poses serious problems for the Covenant in other Provinces as it seems nonsensical to have the Archbishop of Canterbury in the second tier of the Anglican Communion and excluded from the central committees.

“When we launched the No Anglican Covenant Coalition 18 months ago, we were assured that the Anglican Covenant was an unstoppable juggernaut. We started as simply a band of bloggers, but we would like to thank the hundreds of supporters and our patrons for their dedication to promoting debate. The Covenant needed the approval of 23 diocesan synods, as of today, that result is no longer possible.

“Especially we would like to congratulate people in Diocesan Synods across the Church of England who, despite attempts in many dioceses to silence or marginalize dissenting voices, endeavoured to promote debate, ensuring that the Anglican Covenant was subjected to significant and meaningful scrutiny. We found, as the debate went on, that the more people read and studied the Covenant, the less they liked it.

“Under Church of England procedures , this proposal to centralize Communion-wide authority in the hands of a small, self-selecting group cannot return to the agenda of General Synod for at least three years.

“We are seeing the momentum turning internationally as well. The Episcopal Church of the Philippines has officially rejected the Covenant, the opposition of the Tikanga Maori virtually assures that the Covenant will be rejected in the Anglican Church of Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia, and we are seeing increasing opposition in other Provinces of the Communion.

“While today’s diocesan synod results are exciting and gratifying, we are well aware that there is still work to do. However, if the proposed Anglican Covenant does not stand up to scrutiny in the Church of England, we are confident that it will not stand up to scrutiny elsewhere.

“We hope that the Church of England will now look to bring reconciliation within the Anglican Communion by means of strengthening relationships rather than punitive legislation.”

Note: A PDF version of the news release can be found here.
 

Momentum against Proposed Anglican Covenant Continues

In response to today’s votes in Church of England dioceses, the No Anglican Covenant Coalition has issues a news release that can be read in its entirety here. The body of the statement is the following:

LONDON – No Anglican Covenant Coalition Moderator, the Revd Dr Lesley Crawley, responded to the results of today’s voting on the proposed Anglican Covenant by pointing to the continued momentum against the pact in diocesan synods. “With three of five synods voting against, it is clear that there continues to be limited appetite for a new Anglicanism that comprises first- and second-tier members. Many share our concerns that the Covenant seeks to preserve the Communion by making it into something it has never been and never should be.”

Dr Crawley pointed to today’s comments from the Bishop of Liverpool, the Rt Revd James Jones, which effectively articulated the concerns of many faithful Anglicans in England and around the world. According to Bishop Jones:

“…Far from being the salvation of the Communion the Anglican Covenant would undermine it. … Instead of setting us free to engage with a changing world it freezes us at a given point in our formation, holding us back and making us nervous about going beyond the boundaries and reaching out into God’s world. … When we are in Christ, we are in Christ with everybody else who is in Christ, whether we like it or not—or them or not.”

To date, the proposed Anglican Covenant has been approved by 12 dioceses of the Church of England (Lichfield; Durham; Europe; Bristol; Canterbury; Winchester; Sheffield; Bradford; Carlisle; Coventry; Chester; Norwich) and rejected by 20 (Wakefield; St Edmundsbury and Ipswich; Truro; Birmingham; Derby; Gloucester; Portsmouth; Rochester; Salisbury; Leicester; Sodor and Man; Chelmsford; Hereford; Ripon and Leeds; Bath and Wells; Southwark; Worcester; Liverpool; Ely; St Albans). Approval by 23 diocesan synods is required for the Covenant to return to General Synod for further consideration. Rejection by 22 dioceses would effectively derail approval of the Covenant by the Church of England.
 

Growing opposition to the Anglican Covenant in England

Following voting today at five Diocesan Synods in the Church of England, the total voting across all dioceses continues to show a trend of increasing opposition to the proposed Anglican Covenant. Total figures for the 32 dioceses that have voted show the following breakdown:

Bishops: 80.7% for, 11.3% against, 8.1% abstentions
Clergy: 44.8% for, 50.7% against, 4.5% abstentions
Laity: 48.1% for, 47.0% against,  4.9% abstentions

Support continues to drop among the bishops. A majority of clergy is against the Covenant, and less than a majority of laity is for (though a slim plurality of laity is for).

Overall: 47.4% for, 47.8% against, 4.8% abstentions
Overall (clergy and laity only): 46.6% for, 48.7% against, 4.7% abstentions

A growing plurality of the overall vote is against the Covenant.

To date 12 dioceses have voted for the Covenant, and 20 against. Twelve dioceses remain to vote.

In order for the resolution to adopt the Anglican Covenant to return to the Church of England's General Synod in July of this year, a majority of dioceses must approve it (23 of 44). If at least 22 vote against the Covenant, the resolution caannot return to the General Synod for consideration in the current quinquennium (i.e., before 2015).

New Coalition News Release

The No Anglican Covenant has issued a news release remarking on the status of Covenant voting in the Church of England and emphasizing that the Coalition is against the adoption of the Covenant but not opposed to the Anglican Communion. You can read a PDF version of the news release here. Below is reproduced the title and body of the news release.
 

YES TO COMMUNION – NO TO COVENANT

LONDON – With more than half of English dioceses having voted, leaders of the No Anglican Covenant Coalition are cautiously optimistic. To date, a significant majority of dioceses have rejected the proposed Anglican Covenant. Coalition Moderator, the Revd Dr Lesley Crawley, welcomes the introduction of following motions at several recent synods emphasizing support for the Anglican Communion. Four dioceses have already passed following motions (Bath and Wells; Chelmsford; Worcester; Southwark) and a further six have following motions on the agenda (St Albans; Chester; Oxford; Guilford; Exeter; London).

“The more widely the Covenant is read and discussed, the more likely people are to see it as a deeply flawed approach to the challenges of the Anglican Communion in the 21st century,” said Crawley. “The introduction of following motions in several dioceses has emphasized what has been our position from the beginning: we oppose the Covenant because we love the Anglican Communion.”

“The proposed Covenant envisages the possibility that Provinces of the Communion may be barred from representing Anglicanism on certain councils and commissions with the clear implication that they are no longer sufficiently Anglican,” said Coalition Patron Bishop John Saxbee. “It is precisely this dimension of the Covenant which renders the Covenant itself un-Anglican.”

“Some have argued that the Covenant is necessary for ecumenical relations to indicate how Anglicans understand catholicity, even though this is already laid out in the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral and the Declaration of Assent,” according to Coalition Patron Bishop Peter Selby. “The Covenant adds nothing to these other than a bureaucratic disciplinary regime which denies to Anglicanism a distinctiveness which ecumenical partners might come to appreciate or even envy.”

“I’m very disappointed that some Covenant supporters have tried to turn this into a contest about who loves the Communion more, like self-centred parents in some ugly divorce drama,” said Canadian Coalition member, the Ven Alan Perry. “Our position has always been that ‘No’ to the Covenant really is ‘Yes’ to the Communion. Companion diocese relationships came into being without the Covenant and will continue to exist, Covenant or no. Anglicans from around the world care about their Anglican brothers and sisters in places like Haiti or Zimbabwe, and we will continue to care about them with or without the proposed Anglican Covenant. Our current ecumenical relationships began long before the idea of an Anglican Covenant, and they will continue whether the Covenant is accepted or rejected. We are a family, and we shall continue to be a family regardless of what happens.”

To date, the proposed Anglican Covenant has been approved by ten dioceses of the Church of England (Lichfield; Durham; Europe; Bristol; Canterbury; Winchester; Sheffield; Bradford; Carlisle; Coventry) and rejected by 17 (Wakefield; St Edmundsbury and Ipswich; Truro; Birmingham; Derby; Gloucester; Portsmouth; Rochester; Salisbury; Leicester; Sodor and Man; Chelmsford; Hereford; Ripon and Leeds; Bath and Wells; Southwark; Worcester). Approval by 23 diocesan synods is required for the Covenant to return to General Synod for further consideration. Rejection by 22 dioceses would effectively derail approval of the Covenant by the Church of England.
 

Updated voting statistics

Six more Church of England dioceses voted on the Anglican Covenant today. Two voted to support it and four voted against, bringing the total to 10 for and 17 against. If a majority of the dioceses (23 of 44) vote for the Covenant, the motion to adopt it will return to the General Synod in July. If at least half (22) vote against, the motion to adopt cannot return to General Synod in the current quinquennium.

Across all 27 dioceses, the votes by houses look like this:

Bishops: 82.0% for, 10.0% against, 8.0% abstentions
Clergy: 44.6% for, 50.8% against, 4.7% abstentions
Laity: 50.1% for, 45.2% against,  4.7% abstentions

Comparing against last week's figures, one can see that support is dropping in all houses, opposition is growing, and confidence is growing (judging by the declining number of abstentions) except in the House of Bishops.

The bishops seem very much out of touch with the rest of the Church. Clergy and laity are almost evenly split for/against. It's clear that the arguments for the Covenant are not convincing at all. The clergy are decidedly against, and the laity hardly overwhelmingly for.

Overall: 48.4% for, 46.8% against, 4.8% abstentions
Overall (clergy and laity only): 47.6% for, 47.7% against, 4.7% abstentions

Voting Statistics

To date 21 dioceses of the 44 in the Church of England have voted on the proposed Anglican Covenant. If a majority vote for it, then a motion to adopt the Covenant will be put before the General Synod. If at least half vote against, the matter cannot come before the General Synod in the current quinquennium.

Thus far, analysis of voting indicates the following percentages.

Bishops: 84.2% for, 10.5% against, 5.3% abstentions
Clergy: 45.8% for, 48.9% against, 5.4% abstentions
Laity: 50.3% for, 43.9% against, 5.8% abstentions

Overall: 49.1% for, 45.3% against, 5.6% abstentions

Other than the bishops, who seem to be overwhelming in favour of the Covenant (or in favour of voting for the Covenant), the clergy and laity seem to be roughly evenly divided.

Overall, 8 dioceses have voted to date for the Covenant and 13 against.

A Challenge Declined

Yesterday, I challenged the leaders of the Yes to the Covenant group to:

join us in calling on the remaining 27 diocesan bishops to ensure that balanced material is provided to their synods and that appropriate speakers are invited to present both sides of the question when their synods meet.

As a courtesy, I sent an email through the group’s contact page to advise them of the published challenge. I went so far as to offer, should they take up our challenge, to coordinate a joint news release calling on the bishops of the 27 dioceses remaining to ensure a full and fair debate.

Frankly, I wasn’t sure if I should expect any response at all. Fortunately, they proved too mature for that sort of gameplaying, and there ensued a polite exchange of emails with the group’s founder, Miss Prudence Dailey. Miss Dailey has acknowledged by her final email that she had expected I would report on our correspondence. Rather than try to put words in her mouth, I will let her speak for herself. (I’ve edited out the polite pleasantries.)

The ‘Yes to the Covenant’ campaign was set up when we became aware that there was a good deal of anti-Covenant activism taking place, and no pro-Covenant activism; in that context we wanted to balance the debate. Beyond that, it is for each Diocese to decide for itself how to organise its deliberations.

Fair enough. But to avoid any confusion, I wrote back asking for clarification.

Given your suggestion that the debate has been unbalanced to date against the Covenant, I´m wondering if you could point to any example of diocesan synod delegates being denied pro-Covenant material, or where anti-Covenant speakers were given disproportional opportunity to sway the debate. Certainly I´m not aware of a single case like that.

I am aware of at least five cases where only pro-Covenant material was distributed and where only pro-Covenant speakers were designated to introduce the debate. I am not aware of a single diocese where the case for the Covenant has been disadvantaged.

Our position on this matter is clear. We want a full and fair debate where all sides of the question are set before synod members. Should you have evidence of a case where the pro-Covenant position was in any way disadvantaged, I can assure you that the No Anglican Covenant Coalition is more than ready to call for balance.

To which she responded:

Our initiative had the objective of offering an alternative perspective to anti-Covenant propaganda which seemed to be doing the rounds in public space. I really do not know in detail how the 44 dioceses are organising themselves and am taking the view that it is for church people in the dioceses to take up whatever local organisational issues may concern them.

Now, I agree with Miss Dailey’s words that members of diocesan synods need to make an informed decision about the Anglican Covenant. And I certainly agree that the debate to date has often failed synod delegates in this regard.

However any suggestion that the imbalance of the debate has been due to the small band of anti-Covenant campaigners is, frankly, dishonest. Neither Miss Dailey nor anyone else can point to a single diocesan synod where pro-Covenant material has not been provided or where pro-Covenant speakers have been put at a disadvantage.

By contrast, there have been several diocesan synods where members were not provided with anything but pro-Covenant propaganda. There have likewise been several synods where the debate was set up with a lengthy speech by an ardent Covenant supporter with no corresponding presentation by a Covenant critic.

It rather appears that Miss Dailey and her astroturf movement are quite happy to have a debate where only their side is presented. Their idea of fairness and balance could have been dictated by Rupert Murdoch, their idea of informed decision making by Karl Rove.

The reason, of course, is obvious. Every single time that delegates have been provided with balanced information, the Covenant has gone down to defeat.

The only hope for the Anglican Covenant in the Church of England is for members of at least 16 diocesan synods to be stampeded into a hasty decision with limited information, hand picked by its advocates.

The No Anglican Covenant Coalition will continue to press for a fair and balanced discussion of this issue in the remaining 27 diocesan synods. Should the matter return to General Synod, we will continue the struggle there. Over the next few years, as other provinces of the Communion consider the matter, we will continue to do our utmost to ensure that all sides are heard before decisions are taken.

Momentum Shifting in Anglican Covenant Debate

The No Anglican Covenant Coalition has issued a news release titled “Momentum Shifting in Anglican Covenant Debate.” It can be found on the Resources page of the Coalition’s Web site here. The body of the release is reproduced below.

LONDON – With one-third of English dioceses now having voted on the proposed Anglican Covenant, leaders of the No Anglican Covenant Coalition are detecting a significant shift in momentum. With last weekend’s clean sweep in Leicester, Portsmouth, Salisbury and Rochester, ten dioceses have rejected the Covenant while only five have approved it.

“When we launched the No Anglican Covenant Coalition just 16 months ago, it seemed like we were facing impossible odds,” said the Coalition’s Moderator, the Revd Dr Lesley Crawley. “But now the tide appears to be turning. The more church members learn about the Covenant, the less they like it.”

“I’m glad to see how perceptive the diocesan synods have been once well-rounded arguments are put to them,” said Coalition Patron and Oxford University Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch. “There were two Covenants in the Church of England’s seventeenth-century history, and in combination, they destroyed episcopacy until wiser counsels prevailed. It appears the dioceses are not interested in helping present-day bishops making it a hat trick.”

“It is heartening to see the dioceses rising up to their responsibilities instead of delegating their discernment to the House of Bishops and the archbishops,” according to former Oxford Professor and General Synod member Marilyn McCord Adams, who now teaches at the University of North Carolina. “Churches come to better decisions when parties feel free to disagree.” Professor McCord Adams is also a Patron of the No Anglican Covenant Coalition.

To date, the proposed Anglican Covenant has been approved by five dioceses of the Church of England (Lichfield; Durham; Europe; Bristol; Canterbury) and rejected by ten (Wakefield; St. Edmundsbury and Ipswich; Truro; Birmingham; Derby; Gloucester; Portsmouth; Rochester; Salisbury; Leicester). Approval by 23 diocesan synods is required for the Covenant to return to General Synod. Rejection by 22 dioceses would effectively derail approval of the Covenant by the Church of England.
 

A New Slogan?

The Satirical Christian has just posted an essay called “In praise of Arranged Marriage…,” which is a reflection on the speech given by Bishop of Sherborne Graham Kings. The bishop, speaking to the Synod of the Diocese of Salisbury February 18 in support of sending the Anglican Covenant back to the General Synod for final adoption, was unable to prevent the vote from going against his cause. (See the vote totals at Thinking Anglicans.)

“In praise of Arranged Marriage…” suggests that the argument that Kings makes is analogous to insisting on sending the bride down the aisle even though she is not sure the marriage is a good idea. Kings’ logic is the same as that advanced by the Archbishop of Canterbury himself—the Church of England has gone this far down the road of  Covenant adoption, so it makes no sense to stop now.

But, of course, it does make sense to stop when the bride realizes that she is about to commit to a life of misery and unhappiness. The Satirical Christian points out that the best advice anyone can give the bride at that point is “walk away now.”

Perhaps this is the slogan the No Anglican Covenant movement should adopt: WALK AWAY NOW!
 

And Defeat

I reported here yesterday that the Diocese of Derby voted to reject the Anglican Covenant. According to Thinking Anglicans, so has the Diocese of Gloucester, although no vote tallies have been made available. Significantly, Gloucester, like other dioceses that have voted against the Covenant, publicized arguments both for and against the Covenant. (See page on Diocese of Gloucester Web site here.)

Unsurprisingly, the Archbishop of Canterbury’s own diocese has voted in favor of the Covenant and issued a press release to that effect. According to the diocese, the vote was as follows: bishops—1 for; clergy—26 for, 14 against; laity—39 for, 13 against. There were no abstentions. The press release rather gratuitously praises the Covenant. An excerpt:

The Anglican Communion Covenant gives vision to a “communion with autonomy and accountability” and offers an agreed framework for shared processes of decision making, mutual accountability and responsibility for all churches in the Anglican Communion. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has strongly commended the Covenant to the Church of England; in his 2011 Advent letter to the Primates of the Anglican Communion he said the Covenant: “Sets out our common life and common faith and in light of that proposes making a mutual promise to consult and attend to each other, freely undertaken. It recognises that not doing this, damages our relations profoundly.”

How could any possibly object to that?

Update, 2/8/2012: The vote totals for Canterbury were wrong in the original post above. They are now correct. (See comments below.)

Victory in Derby

We are beginning another season of Church of England synods voting on whether to approve sending the proposed Anglican Communion back to the General Synod for final adoption by the church. Needless to say, the No Anglican Covenant Coalition is working to encourage dioceses to vote No on the Covenant.

We received word today that the Diocese of Derby has not only voted No, but has done so rather decisively. The single bishop present voted against. Of the clergy, 21 voted against, 1 voted for, and 2 abstained. Of the laity, 24 voted against, 2 voted for, and 1 abstained.

It is widely assumed that, if the Church of England rejects the Anglican Covenant, the Covenant project will be effectively ended.
 

A Christmas Letter from a Coalition Member

What follows is a Christmas letter to Anglicans from Church of England and No Anglican Covenant Coalition (NACC) member Jean M Mayland on behalf of the NACC. The letter represents a reply to the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Advent letter.
 

December 9, 2011

To my fellow Anglicans,

We greet you all in the name of Jesus, whose re-birth in us at Christmas we all long for in this Advent season of darkness, waiting, and hope.

We rejoice in the fellowship of our Anglican Communion, which is held together by bonds of affection. These bonds appear gossamer thin, but they have held us all together for a very long time. They are founded on a base of trust and friendship and are rooted in our shared worship and our Anglican appeal to Scripture, Tradition, and Reason. We rejoice that, over the years, we have been able to maintain a unity that encompasses differences in belief and practice. We have learnt how to live with different ideas and to be open and welcoming to those who are searching for meaning in their lives.

We were pleased to read in his Advent letter of the hope and help that the Archbishop of Canterbury has been able to give during his visits throughout the Communion in 2011. Many of us have visited other churches of the Communion and have been humbled by the suffering and the faith we found there. Equally, we have been impressed by the witness shown in countries where materialism and secularism are rampant. We recognize that our common mission needs to be carried out in different ways in different places. This has been respected in the past.

We are saddened that some Communion churches are now deeply divided over one issue and, for the first time in the history of our Communion, are not prepared to live with differences. Some Anglican churches and some individuals in other churches seem entirely unable to accept the fact that some Anglican churches may have an entirely different attitude towards gay and lesbian people and believe that it is essential to their mission to treat such people with full respect and equality. Beneath this division are different ways of interpreting the Bible, different attitudes towards authority, and differing degrees of importance accorded human reason.

This new intolerance has led to the drawing up of the proposed Anglican Covenant and to demands for moratoria on certain actions until all Communion members have agreed on them. Had such moratoria on innovation been in place years ago, the first woman priest would never have been ordained in Hong Kong, and we likely would have no women priests in the Anglican Communion today.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has stated that the Covenant is essential and claims that it “outlines a procedure, such as we urgently need, for attempting reconciliation and for indicating the sorts of consequences that might result from a failure to be fully reconciled. It alters no Province’s constitution, as it has no canonical force independent of the life of the Provinces. It does not create some unaccountable and remote new authority but seeks to identify a representative group that might exercise a crucial advisory function.”

Yet action has already been taken against The Episcopal Church (TEC) in the USA because Episcopalians did not observe the moratoria concerning gay clergy.

In our view, the structures of our Communion and churches—the bureaucracy, canon law, etc—ought to reflect our theology. The great bust-up over gay bishops and the continuing border-crossings are the product of theological disagreement, not weaknesses in the bureaucracy. Central to the dispute is the epistemological question of how we Anglicans go about deciding what God wants us to do. In one camp, we have those who claim that the supreme authority of scripture overrides all other truth claims; in the other camp, we have those who claim that extra-biblical processes have real authority, too. Because those in the former camp view theirs as the only legitimate account of Christianity, they are naturally intolerant of other accounts. The question the leaders of Anglicanism ought to be addressing, therefore, is this: are we to move towards uniformity and intolerance, or are we to defend toleration and diversity against the forces of uniformity?

We believe that the No Anglican Covenant Coalition is defending the traditional toleration and diversity of Anglicanism from a desire to force us all into a way of uniformity.

The Archbishop wrote, “I continue to ask what alternatives there are if we want to agree on ways of limiting damage, managing conflict and facing with honesty the actual effects of greater disunity. In the absence of such alternatives, I must continue to commend the Covenant as strongly as I can to all who are considering its future.”

For our part, we would continue to resist the acceptance of the Covenant with all our energy and commitment.

We maintain strongly that the Anglican Communion must regain its ability to live with difference and to recognize that it is essential that churches be free to carry out their mission in ways appropriate to their particular circumstances.

In England, for example, if Parliament holds firm on Civil Partnerships being able to take place in religious buildings, the situation comes nearer when General Synod will be pressed to allow this in the Church of England. Surely Synod would not be prepared to move forward in this way only to be told “we cannot do this lest we break the terms of the Covenant.” We need to minister here in England and not in Nigeria.

The Archbishop asks for alternatives to Covenant adoption. We can think of any number of alternatives to what we continue to see as a deeply flawed and ineffectual effort at conflict management:

• We would put first the responsibility of the Communion to be active in mission in its own way and in its own setting.

• This mission would be carried out on the basis of the Covenant for Communion in Mission from IASCOM.

• There should be an expansion of ministry and mission coöperation between Communion churches focused not on the mechanics of the Communion or disagreements on policies, but on doing the things Jesus actually commanded.

• We should continue to provide forums for the sharing of views between Communion churches, as in the Continuing Indaba and Mutual Listening Process, which is “a biblically-based and mission-focused project designed to develop and intensify relationships within the Anglican Communion by drawing on cultural models of consensus building for mutual creative action.” (See here and here.)

• We should encourage visits across church boundaries to seek information and to open up dialogue, but not to interfere in the business of other churches.

• The traditional, purely consultative function of the Lambeth Conference should be reasserted, and such resolutions as are passed should be clearly represented as advisory only and not legally binding.

• We must maintain our Communion as a Communion where authority is dispersed. We are not a Papal church nor one governed by a Curia.

We carry out our mission in each and every place together with other Christians. Our ecumenical relations should not only be with Roman Catholics and Orthodox, but also with the Methodist, Reformed, and Lutheran Churches, which also have worldwide memberships with freedom to carry out their mission in their own way in their own place.

Finally, we look forward to a time when the Communion abandons this vain attempt to impose a Covenant on its members and seeks out new ways of fellowship, care, and mission in the name of Our Lord.

Yours in Christ,
Jean M Mayland
 

An Invitation To Learn About The Covenant

Changing Attitude and Modern Church in Ripon and Leeds:

 Meeting about the Anglican Covenant

You are warmly invited to come to a meeting about the Anglican Covenant on Monday 16 January 2012 at 7.30pm at St Andrews Church, Butcher Hill, Leeds, LS16 5BG
The Revd Jonathan Clatworthy, general secretary of Modern Church will address the meeting, explaining why the Anglican Covenant should be opposed.
All are welcome

Further information from:
Revd Mike Benwell, Convenor, Changing Attitude, Leeds, 0113 273130
Christine Alker, Administrator, Modern Church, 0845 345 1909 or office@modernchurch.org.uk

An Evangelical Response to Fulcrum

At the invitation of Dr. Lesley Crawley, the Coalition’s moderator, the Rev. Mark Bennet offered this brief analysis of Fulcrum’s incredible endorsement of the Covenant. We reprint it here with permission. We are posting it without comments because it needs none.

***************************************

It is disappointing that an evangelical justification of the document nowhere cites scripture to justify the use of the word Covenant to describe a refashioning of the structures of human power and authority within the Church. In fact it doesn’t seem to mention scripture at all and describes the “Covenant” as a political document, not a theological one. The defence also makes ecclesiological assumptions and assertions which are inadequately justified—in particular putting process before relationship. It is like having a pre-nup: it assumes that the relationship is insufficient. God’s answer is the incarnation deepening the relationship in spite of the pain, because that is the only route to healing. The use of the word “only” in point 8 is almost a denial of the Gospel.