anglican

Are you serious? You’re going to do this now?

From the BBC:

Anglican conservatives form group

Conservatives are challenging the Archbishop of Canterbury’s leadership
Conservative Anglicans meeting in Jerusalem will create a global network to combat modern trends in the Church like the ordination of gay clergy.

The group has also decided to break its relationship with the liberal wings of the US and Canadian Churches.

It will operate independently of the Archbishop of Canterbury, but will stay inside the Anglican Communion. The traditionalists say they are fighting a “false Gospel” and the rift in the Church cannot be patched up. After five years of trying unsuccessfully to get the American church expelled for its ordination of an openly gay bishop and blessing of same-sex relationships in church, the traditionalists say the international alliance will emphasise a more orthodox reading of the Bible.

Are you kidding me? Right before Lambeth?

The move underlines the alliance’s independence from the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and makes clear that it will no longer recognise Dr Williams’ traditional role as the leader of the world’s Anglicans.

Great, they’re going after Williams — the one who is trying to maintain a middle ground. Withdrawing from Williams’ authority doesn’t solve the problem. These specific conservatives are still in eucharistic communion with the dreaded “liberals,” even if it says its breaking its relationship with ’em: “The group said it would stay inside the Anglican Communion, but with its own statement of theology and council of archbishops.”

This split doesn’t seem to address anything, but rather puts more pressure on Williams for Lambeth. This seems like a political move to me and not so ecclesial or theological. That is unless this is the dreaded split right here (as it seems historically mandated, the conservatives just up and left again) and they really aren’t staying in the Anglican Communion. Theres a difference between ambiguity, being unclear, or trying to have it both ways. This seems like the latter two. It sure doesn’t seem like a sophisticated response with well placed ambiguity/flexibility, thats for sure.

Advertisements
Standard

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s