No Anglican Covenant Coalition
Anglicans for Comprehensive Unity
NEWS RELEASE
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2010
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NO ANGLICAN COVENANT COALITION RESPONDS TO GENERAL SYNOD VOTE
LONDON – Responding to the voting on the proposed Anglican Covenant by the Church of England General Synod, No Anglican Covenant Coalition Moderator, the Revd. Dr. Lesley Fellows made the following statement:
“The No Anglican Covenant Coalition is disappointed that the Church of England has voted to continue consideration of the Anglican Covenant. The debate made it clear that many members believe the Covenant will undermine the traditional Anglican comprehensiveness. We have lost this round. We will continue to oppose the Covenant in the Diocesan Synods and work to defeat it when it returns to the General Synod.”
“We note that the GAFCON Primates have said 'the current text is fatally flawed and so support for this initiative is no longer appropriate.' A two-tier communion appears to be unavoidable.'”
noanglicancovenant.org
Revd. Dr. Lesley Fellows (England) +44 1844 239268
Dr. Lionel Deimel (USA) +1-412-512-9087
Revd. Malcolm French (Canada) +1-306-550-2277
Revd. Lawrence Kimberley (New Zealand) +64 3 981 7384
Revd. Hugh Magee +44 1334 470446
4 comments:
just the usual Anglican fudge - keep talking for a while. With GAFCON's declaration of independence, there is no further point...
Fr Craig's take is the kindest possible way to look at this...
In many ways, the Covenant is moot. Conservatives want a covenant with "teeth" and this particular document is almost toothless, and such teeth as it has are worn and wobbly - and will not be enforced anyway, given the track record of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Progressives do not want a covenant; the very idea of being held responsible to an international agreement is repugnant, as it would stifle the "voice of the Spirit."
I have an idea that the Anglican Communion is on its last legs. It may take some time to topple, but its end is inevitable.
Charles - I consider myself a Progressive and I do not want the Covenant, but not for the reasons you state.
I certainly don't mind mutual responsibility and accountability. Indeed, I think it's important in community. I'm a progressive, not an anarchist.
What I do object to is that this is a contract - not a covenant - that is not about the things Jesus held dear: repentance, confession, forgiveness, reconciliation, and renewal. It's about "offense" and "relational consequence".
To try to put a positive spin on this AC is to put lipstick on a pig.
Post a Comment