A rather scary article has appeared on the Daily Telegraph web site under the heading, "Archbishop backs two-track Church to heal divisions," and presumably will appear in tomorrow's edition. It purports to reveal details of the Archbishop of Canterbury's plan [sic] to "save" the Anglican Communion. Unfortunately, not too many words into the article, the Telegraph's Religion Correspondent - Jonathan Petre - abandons reporting for speculative "commentary:"
The proposals, which have parallels with the idea of a two-speed European Union, could permit liberals from North America to push ahead with divisive reforms such as homosexual bishops without destroying the Church.
But they could also allow conservatives from Africa and Asia to form an influential inner core that would edge out the liberals from positions of power and reduce them to a second-class status.
Mr. Petre goes on to anticipate the plan's rejection by 'liberals' and 'conservatives' alike, for very different reasons, of course.
Fortunately, in a more judicious piece on the web site of THE LIVING CHURCH FOUNDATION, Steve Waring describes the document - "Towards an Anglican Covenant" - as having been adopted by the the Joint Standing Committee of the Primates and the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) for "discussion and reflection in the Communion." It is not that Mr. Waring is in the slightest naive about the possible outcomes of this process, but rather that he leaves to the document itself to point to the inherent risks:
For the covenant to work, it would have to consist of a single formulation "which is not subject to negotiation and opt-outs by each Church or Province … there comes a point at which Provinces and Churches will have to say about the Covenant that they will ‘take it or leave it’.”
An Anglican covenant offers dangers as well as benefits, according to the report. “Some worry that a covenant might be seen to alter the nature of the Communion towards that of a narrowly confessional family, with the attendant danger that preparedness to sign up to the covenant becomes a test of authentic membership,” the report states. “Others might see a potential danger in establishing a bureaucratic and legalistic foundation at the very heart of the Communion; putting at risk inspired and prophetic initiatives in God’s mission and threatening Anglican comprehensiveness. There is also a fear that the Anglican Communion might become a centralized jurisdiction.”
Finally, the Report does echo, in more muted terms, Petre's "idea of a two-speed European Union:"
"What might emerge is a two (or more) tiered Communion, with some level of permeability between churches signed up to the Covenant, and those who are not,” the report said.
I must say that the prospect of a process lasting till 2009 before a Covenant can even be drawn up is rather daunting, if inevitable. Some of us would have liked to see this matter settled before we are translated to the Church Triumphant. Perhaps I need to begin thinking about what I might say to Archbishop Akinola in that circumstance. Mmm … "Fancy meeting you here?"
Comments