The Guardian report on what happened at the Evangelical Conference in London Saturday. It looks like liberals aren't the only ones who manipulate by parliamentary procedure. At any rate it shows how deep the divisions are among conservatives relative to Gafcon and a new province. This one's worth going to the link and reading in its entirety.The chair of CEEC, Richard Turnbull, is the Principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford, which is currently being inspected by the Church of England following the controversial multiple resignations and sackings there.
He proposed a motion in the afternoon which was not on the agenda published beforehand, but merely put on the chairs prior to the beginning of the consultation, with the added note that "no amendments will be permitted". Some saw the motion, others did not. It was not mentioned at all from the front in the morning.
The motion, in effect, backed the Gafcon movement (which is about to set up a separate "province" in North America) while ignoring the process urged by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Lambeth Conference, which is supported by many evangelical Anglicans. This pursues, with patience and urgency, the Covenant for the Anglican Communion and a pastoral forum for conservatives in North America.
At the consultation, our unity was clear in that we are committed to the teaching of the communion on sexuality and opposed to the developments in North America which have caused this crisis. However, we differed on ecclesiology, the shape of the church. Some spoke up for Gafcon and others for the Lambeth process. The difficulty of the motion was that it seemed to be trying to force this division by being sprung on us at the last minute without opportunity for amendment.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2008/nov/17/religion-anglicanism
4 comments:
It's hardly being sprung on anyone at the last minute. This is five years in the making - either we're in a crisis or we're not. If anyone should know that depth and breath (and lack of suddeness) of this crisis, Jim, it's you. Tell the story.
bb
The motion certainly was sprung at the last minute,
and "no amendments were allowed." What I was reading on Fulcrum (whose mission is "to renew the Evangelical center"--and I think Fulcrum as been around since 2005) during the weeks before the meeting of the broader group of evangelicals had to do whether the membership on the CEEB board would be broadened or not; would CEs continue to dominate, and men, or would COs--and women-- be included? Then there was that surprise proposal on the chairs at the meeting. No wonder the decision was made to not vote on it. --There are splits between evangelicals in the U.S., too-Sojourner people have worked hard to reclaim the term from the Jerry Falwell group.
Correction: I should have said CEEC.
I guess where you stand is on how tolerant you are or how patient?
Post a Comment