Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Common Cause Communique

It didn’t take long for Common Cause to issue a communiqué from their Orlando meeting yesterday. I don’t know quite what to make of it. I suspect it may be one of those statements where what is not said is more important than what is said.

Another development: the Anglican Province of America is divided over participation in Common Cause as freely acknowledged by Presiding Bishop Walter Grundorf:

This subject has generated much conversation and seems to dominate the thinking of so many in our Province. It has caused great division among us and has polarized those who support remaining as partners and those who wish to see us only as observers at the Partnership meetings.

For now, they are observers.


Hat tip to Stand Firm.

3 comments:

texanglican said...

Newbie, I spoke this afternoon with a participant in the meeting (A FiFNA representative from our diocese) who said the meeting went well with a very positive spirit. He was quite well pleased. And very much encouraged that full unity will one day be achieved.

And I would not read too much into APA's delay. They could not act officially on anything related to it until their Synod in June 2008, from what I understand. Of course, I have no doubt that there are "die hards" in APA who will not want anything whatsoever to do with any organization that a female "presybter" within a thousand miles of it, and they may try to keep APA out. But the fears that CCP has too much evangelical influence would surely be put to rest by the participation of Fort Worth, Quincy and San Joaquin. I think they will sign up when they get a chance to pass judgment on it.

REC CHIP said...

It's not just the APA. I know that Bishop Iker made some comments about "full communion" not being possible and the whole WOMEN thing has been a MAJOR discussion in the REC.

The "Federation" part has been what has kept people happy so far.

texanglican said...

But don't forget, REC CHIP, that we in Fort Worth have been part of a province that has been jurisdictionally united--without being in sacramental "full communion" with a significant part of it on account of WO--for more than 30 years. Please don't read Bishop Iker's remarks to mean that he believes a new province won't be possible if CANA or Pittsburgh, with their female alleged presbyters, are part of it. Having a significant pro-WO contingent within it isn't ideal, but from my perspective it ought not keep the new province from coming into being. (Personally, I hope that once it forms we can "grandmother" them out, and I think that is quite possible.)