Author Archive
Written by: Rev. Dr. Andrew Goddard
Friday, January 13th, 2012
Life is always more interesting when things don’t go as planned. That alone should make the Anglican Communion Covenant interesting in 2012. General Synod rarely refers matters to dioceses. When it does, it often seems – as with women bishops – a procedural necessity with a foregone positive conclusion. As 2011 closes, the covenant has departed from that script. It has the support of four dioceses but been rejected by four dioceses. At least 23 of the 44 dioceses must support it for it to return to General Synod for final approval. The 2012 diocesan synod debates are therefore crucial. To resource these, Fulcrum has recently collated various articles and produced a short “Churchgoer’s Guide to the Anglican Communion Covenant”. This concludes with the following ten reasons to support the covenant.
read more...
January 13 2012 | Articles
Written by: Rev. Dr. Andrew Goddard
Wednesday, January 26th, 2011
Reflecting on Fulcrum’s call not to invite the Presiding Bishop to the Primates’ Meeting in Ireland, the consequences of inviting her are highlighted: the widespread principled absence of many Global South primates. As it is still unclear why the Presiding Bishop was invited after the breach of the moratorium and the Pentecost Letter, three possible scenarios are outlined in the hope that the rationale for this decision may be made clear. Then, drawing on past Primates’ statements and statements from TEC, three justifications for non-invitation and grounds for non-attendance are outlined: developments in TEC are now indisputably a breach of the moratoria, TEC has displayed a lack of integrity in its dealings with the Communion and its own stance reveals a lack of coherence in teaching and practice while increasingly signalling a determination to re-define the Christian doctrine of marriage. After exploring some of the challenges of holding a meeting to address key issues in the Communion but with the leaders of most of the world’s Anglicans not present, possible future paths for the Communion are outlined in relation to both the need for serious theological discussion about sexuality and the need to reform the Instruments, all of which have seen their authority eroded through this crisis. The conclusion notes that various actions and inactions in recent years have had serious damaging consequences and highlights the need to pray that, while nothing said or done this week can be painless, the actions of this gathering of Primates may have positive consequences for the Communion’s future unity.
read more...
January 26 2011 | Articles
Written by: Rev. Dr. Andrew Goddard
Thursday, November 18th, 2010
In the church press on Friday 29th October, two Church of England groups, Inclusive Church (IC) and Modern Church (formerly, Modern Churchpeople’s Union, MCU), published a whole page advert headed ‘Who runs the Church?’. This explains why they believe the Anglican Covenant would be a change for the worse. Having offered an initial short critique of it, this offers a more detailed analysis of its claims. In the week leading to the Synod debate on the covenant and subsequent diocesan discussion, their seriously flawed case risks being given greater circulation and credibility through the wider international (though predominantly Western liberal) No Anglican Covenant Coalition and other publicity such as the recent similar leaflet sent to General Synod members.
read more...
November 18 2010 | Articles
Written by: Rev. Dr. Andrew Goddard
Monday, July 21st, 2008
One of the most serious questions left unanswered after the GAFCON conference was where the movement stood in relation to the proposed Anglican covenant. That question now appears to have been answered fairly unequivocally in two documents (from the GAFCON Theological Resource Team) on the St Andrew’s Draft Text to which the 7 GAFCON Primates refer in their response to the Archbishop of Canterbury. These are apparently based on pre-conference discussions in Jerusalem.
read more...
July 21 2008 | Articles
Written by: Rev. Dr. Andrew Goddard
Thursday, December 6th, 2007
While a number of aspects of my recent mapping of the Anglican Communion have been criticised (see my broader response here), probably the most controversial and contested aspect was the suggestion that we need to move from a simple pro-I.10 and anti-I.10 stance in relation to sexual ethics and distinguish four positions on the spectrum.
read more...
December 06 2007 | Articles
Written by: Rev. Dr. Andrew Goddard
Wednesday, October 17th, 2007
As many predicted, some hopefully and some fearfully, the Joint Standing Committee (JSC) have given a positive assessment of the response of the The Episcopal Church’s (TEC) House of Bishops to the Primates’ Questions from Dar Es Salaam. In particular, in relation to the two key requests concerning TEC’s response to The Windsor Report (TWR), JSC conclude
read more...
October 17 2007 | Articles
Written by: Rev. Dr. Andrew Goddard
Saturday, September 29th, 2007
In attempting to evaluate the HoB response it is necessary to sketch the key stages in the four years of the Windsor Process since the Lambeth Commission was created in October 2003 (Section I). It is then necessary to examine very carefully the wording of the HoB response in the light of that history (Section II). Here a major question arises concerning the stance of the interpreter. Some people, as becomes especially obvious in times of crisis, are optimistic and generous (‘surely it’s half full’) while others tend to be pessimistic and suspicious (‘actually, it’s half empty (at best)’). Among the factors determining one’s stance are not only issues of personality and psychology but past history in a relationship and political position (those working to hold the Communion together are probably tempted to be ‘half full’ people, those who believe it has already fallen apart and some major realignment is necessary will tend to be ‘half empty’ interpreters). My own tendency is, I think, to be ‘half full’ but the crucial test is careful examination of the wording to determine exactly what is (and what is not) being said and how it relates to what has been asked and what has been said in the past. In the light of detailed analysis a summary assessment is offered of the HoB’s response (Section III) before the implications for five areas – TEC, Communion evaluation, Windsor bishops, Common Cause and Lambeth 2008 – are sketched (Section IV) and, finally, a conclusion is offered (Section V).
read more...
September 29 2007 | Articles
Written by: Rev. Dr. Andrew Goddard
Saturday, February 17th, 2007
The Report of the Communion Sub-Group of the Joint Standing Committee of the Primates’ meeting and the Anglican Consultative Council produced instant responses of horror from those committed to Lambeth I.10 and delight from those wishing to see The Episcopal Church (TEC) remain fully integrated in the life of the Communion. It is not difficult to see why these were the initial reactions but it may be that a more measured judgment needs to be made which, while highlighting the serious flaws in the report’s analysis, also recognises its potential significance in shaping a reconfiguring of the relationship of TEC to the Communion, the Communion’s development and the ongoing Windsor process.
read more...
February 17 2007 | Articles