Reason for the Meeting
 Members of the congregation met on Sunday 16th January to discuss the Windsor Report and the proposals emerging from it. This is a summary of the meeting, and will be presented to the South Area Council of the Diocese on 26th January. The views of the congregations in the South Area will be brought together, and fed into a consultative meeting of members of Synod, which will be attended by the Primus, on 3rd February. The meeting will inform the Primus, prior to a meeting of the Primates and Moderators of the Anglican Communion between 20th and 26th February, in Northern Ireland , called to discuss the report.

Conclusion
The meeting, having discussed the issues, and respectfully listened to views from all the contributors, is of the view that a Covenant is not the preferred way forward.   The Anglican Communion needs to respect the integrity of each member church, and respect their autonomy. The Anglican Communion should enjoin in respectful debate all the issues pertinent to the development of each member church. They should seek to understand and acknowledge the commonalities that bind the Anglican Church together, and celebrate the diversity that enriches the Communion. A simple and relatively minimal set of common tenets is required. Member churches should seek to explore the views of other churches with integrity, in respect of any development they wish to make, but should not be constrained by a detailed covenant that would impinge on a Province’s autonomy.

Background
Our discussion was helped by a very helpful sermon by Rt. Revd. Bob Holliday. The text is available at: www.6a.org.uk select “Enter Site” and then click on “Sermon Archive”.

     The discussion was focussed on looking at Appendix 2 to the Report (pp65 – 71). The Appendix defines an “Anglican Covenant”, that the report recommends should be signed by all Primates in the Anglican Communion. The Covenant has 5 parts:
    1.    Common Identity
    2.   Relationships of Communion
    3    Commitments of Communion
    4    Exercise of Autonomy in Communion
    5    Management of Communion Issues

  The meeting discussed some of the background to the reasons for the report.  These centred around two key events; the election of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire (Gene Robinson is in a same-sex relationship), and the development of a same-sex partnership blessing service in the Diocese of New Westminster, Vancouver, British Columbia. Gene was elected under the Episcopal Church of the United States of America (ECUSA) canons, and had been a member of the community there for a considerable period of time – over 20 years.

   The Report asks that ECUSA apologise to the Anglican Communion for taking the action of appointing Gene Robinson, and also asks that the Bishops who involved themselves in the affairs of another Province and Diocese should apologise for so doing.

   Some other background was also drawn to the meeting’s attention.

   At the 1988 Lambeth Conference Archbishop Donald Runcie started discussions about the ordination of women to the priesthood, in advance of any Province actually taking action. This meant that by the time the first Province did move to female priests, the issue had been aired, and there was not an extreme level of surprise and reaction from Provinces.

      At the 1998 Lambeth Conference the issue of homosexual clergy was raised. It was not on the agenda for the meeting, and there are views that it was not handled well, self-interested “power-blocks” wished to pursue a particular line. The debate did not result in any consensus view, a vote created a real split in views amongst the bishops. In general terms many of the bishops of African provinces and some more conservative American bishops voted to bar homosexuals from the priesthood, whilst many other bishops voted against the motion to bar homosexuals. This vote was the starting point for the current issues now being raised.

     ECUSA, have in many instances, been at the forefront of changing values and methods of interpreting our faith. They have frequently taken a radical step forward, and some other provinces have followed their lead in due course. In this way the Anglican Communion has stretched the boundaries of its practices.

     The Anglican Communion is founded on the notion that there is a common sharing of faith and practices, and all practices are acceptable to the other members of the Communion. This means that there should be no action taken by one Province that is not acceptable to the other members. However, it is also recognised that practices will vary based on local cultures, values, and history, and therefore it should not be thought essential that all practices and church laws should be replicated across the Communion. What is a pragmatic and practical solution in one province may not be so in another.

    If all Provinces only adhered to law and practices of total acceptability to all other provinces, there would be no change, no diversity of practice.

    The Anglican Communion is an, almost, unique grouping, in that each Bishop has an equal vote and say at the meeting of Bishops.

    The Report & Covenant
    The meeting discussed the five parts of the Covenant: 
         »    Article 1 part 3 seems to add a new requirement “…and as being the rule and ultimate standard of faith.” The meeting was concerned at this addition to part 3.
         »     Article 5 reinforces the autonomy of each member church, but the Covenant as a whole runs counter to this autonomy in providing a set of confines within which autonomy is given. The meeting was greatly concerned that autonomy for each member church could not be squared with the need for a covenant. Full autonomy meant just that.
         »     Article 9 part 2 indicates action by a church should be done in consideration of the common good of the Communion. This reflects   the current understanding of what the current instruments of unity of the Communion are.

     There were some general points raised, not relating to any one article. They included:  
         »    A covenant will, if adhered to, create a conservative organisation, with minimal change, with a danger that some member churches of the Anglican Communion being less relevant to their cultures and developing external environment.
          »     A covenant has historically been shown to be a document that introduces many issues for debate and disagreement, quite often disagreement, time and energy focussed on articles of little intrinsic value to the whole.  
        »    A covenant may well be too binding, the Anglican Communion needs to promote autonomy for its provinces, ensuring democracy within each Province. It could become an instrument with which to “beat” a perceived errant church with.
        »    The Lambeth-Chicago Quadrilateral is a simple statement of faith, and as such has much to recommend itself. There is minimal room for disagreement about its four tenets. 
        »   Our Faith evolves as our external and internal environment evolves around us. As the Anglican Communion reaches all parts of God’s world it is natural that some member churches will develop differently to others.  By necessity the Anglican Communion must therefore remain the broadest of groupings, allowing differential development. The Covenant seems to want to place to great a restriction on this differential development, seeking too great a level of homogeneity.
        »     Autonomy must be accompanied by the full respect of integrity.  Some recent debates and actions, including those who have actively campaigned or created pressure groups aligned to their views, have shown little or no evidence of respecting the integrity of others.
       »    The Covenant seems to open the door to a future centralist control of the churches by the Bishops’ Conference, or the Archbishop of Canterbury.

     Web links for further information:

                        Nick Bowry
                       6^th February, 2005