Written by: The Anglican Communion Institute, Inc.
Wednesday, April 25th, 2007
It is becoming obvious that the leadership of TEC means to move resolutely ahead with its mission of civil rights and inclusion, insisting that these are imperatives of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and a kind of brand name for American Episcopalianism. (We leave to the side whether inclusion or civil rights are being honored or thwarted by this idea.)
April 25 2007 | Articles
Written by: The Anglican Communion Institute, Inc.
Wednesday, April 25th, 2007
The Anglican Communion Institute is pursuing incorporation in the state of Texas, and the process should be concluded in good time. We have received excellent legal counsel. In many ways this move is a reversion to the status we had at SEAD for over a decade. We are grateful that the Revd Frank Fuller has agreed to serve as Treasurer and Mr Craig Uffman as webmaster. We have seen profit in adjusting our domain name at this time to http://anglicancommunioninstitute.com. The older site will automatically convert to the new one. It has a slightly different format but all the older material is there, or will be, in due course.
April 25 2007 | Articles
Written by: The Anglican Communion Institute, Inc.
Tuesday, April 24th, 2007
We are pleased to announce the launch of our new web site. Here you will find articles we publish on the web as well as print publications that we think you’ll find useful, with handy links to Amazon.com. We will also post ACI news here as we respond to happenings in the Anglican Communion.
April 24 2007 | Articles
Written by: The Anglican Communion Institute, Inc.
Thursday, April 19th, 2007
The Anglican Communion Institute has argued consistently for solutions to our present conflicts that preserve the integrity of The Episcopal Church (TEC), the Anglican Communion (AC), and the full membership of TEC in that Communion. The overwhelmingly negative response of the House of Bishops to the proposals from Dar es Salaam made by the Meeting of Primates (MP) leaves little doubt in our minds that the Bishops and Dioceses of TEC will soon have to decide two crucial questions that touch the very center of these concerns. (1) How they individually and collectively are going to continue relations with the AC through its instruments of communion (the Lambeth Conference, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the MP, and the Anglican Consultative Council); and (2) how the Bishops and Dioceses of TEC are going to continue relations one with another through their own instruments of governance (the General Convention, the Executive Council, and the House of Bishops)? In like manner, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the MP are going to have to determine how they will continue or not continue in relation both to the various Dioceses of TEC and its instruments of governance.
April 19 2007 | Articles
Written by: Rev. Dr. Ephraim Radner
Wednesday, April 11th, 2007
Many, including those opposing its content, have praised the recent House of Bishops Statement for its “clarity”. In what follows, I want to dispute that evaluation. The Statement is unclear in numerous important respects, except one, viz. its animus against the Anglican Communion’s Primates’ Meeting. The reasons for that animus, however, are hardly spelled out, are often contradictory, and are lodged within a tissue of assertions that are without stated rationale. This is not clarity at all. And in the context of the current agonized and conflicted debate within TEC and the Communion, the Statement amounts to an act of pastoral and theological irresponsibility of the highest order.
April 11 2007 | Articles
Written by: The Anglican Communion Institute, Inc.
Monday, April 2nd, 2007
The decision by the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church to reject the Pastoral Council, and the much harsher statements about the character and responsibility of the Primates Meeting as an Instrument of Unity, made by individual Bishops of the Episcopal Church, have caught many of us off guard.
We leave here to the side the accounts of the Presiding Bishop’s understanding of her role at Dar es Salaam in respect of the communiqué, and her subsequent interpretations of that role in the context of the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church (TEC). Much of this is simply confusing. At times there appears to be a willingness to concede that the Pastoral Council and Primatial Vicar schemes are fully within the realm of canonical viability, and desirability. At other points this becomes contested.
April 02 2007 | Articles