The Windsor Report 2004

Endnotes

  1. These occasional gatherings have been held from time to time. The first Congress was held in London in 1908; the second in Minneapolis in 1954; the third in Toronto in 1963. An 'Anglican Gathering' is currently in preparation for 2008 in Cape Town, South Africa.

  2. The 'Ten Principles of Partnership' are set out in Appendix Three/5

  3. A description of the nature and work of the Primates' Meetings is given in paragraph 104

  4. The Gift of Sexuality: A theological perspective, Report of the Theology Committee of the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church, offered for study and reflection by the House of Bishops, 18 March 2003, paragraphs 7.0 and 7.1. See http://arc.episcopalchurch.org/presiding-bishop/pdf/theologycomreport.pdf.

  5. Lambeth 1978, Resolution 10; Lambeth 1988, Resolution 64 - reproduced in Appendix Three/2&3.
  6. The text of the 1998 Resolution 1.10 is included in Appendix Three/6.

  7. The full text of the Primates' Statement is included in Appendix Three/10.

  8. The relevant section of the Pastoral Letter is reproduced at paragraph 142.

  9. “… the Lambeth resolution of 1998 declares clearly what is the mind of the overwhelming majority in the Communion, and what the Communion will and will not approve or authorise. I accept that any individual diocese or even province that officially overturns or repudiates this resolution poses a substantial problem for the sacramental unity of the Communion.”, Letter to the Primates, Archbishop Rowan Williams, 23 July 2002.

  10. From the statement by the Primates of the Anglican Communion meeting in Lambeth Palace, 16 October 2003, reproduced in Appendix Three/10.

  11. Resolution C051 Liturgy/Music: Blessing of Committed Same-Gender Relationships, reproduced in Appendix Three/9.

  12. The full texts of Resolutions A134 Blessing of Same Sex Unions and A135 Blessing of Same Sex Unions - Resources are included in Appendix Three/12.

  13. Such developments or debate can be found in the United Church of Canada, the Lutheran Church of Sweden, and some Old Catholic dioceses in Europe.

  14. Pope John Paul II's address to the Archbishop Of Canterbury, October 2003

  15. A summary of some of the earlier statements may be found in footnote 19 of 'What is the Anglican Communion for?', a submission made to the Lambeth Commission by Canon Chris Sugden of the Oxford Centre for Mission Studies, available on the Commission website at http://www.aco.org/ecumenical/commissions/lambeth/documents/200402whatisitfor.pdf

  16. For discussion of the meaning of these terms, see paragraph 50.

  17. See, for example, the declaration by Nigeria of 15 November 2003, “We continue to stand solidly behind the leadership of the Church of Nigeria in breaking relationship, not only with the Diocese of New Hampshire, but with all bishops and dioceses in ECUSA that have joined in this divisive and unscriptural act.”, and the declaration by the House of Bishops of the Church of Uganda on 20 November 2003, “The Church of the Province of Uganda (Anglican) cuts her relationship and Communion with the Episcopal Church of the United States of America (ECUSA) on their resolution and consequent action of consecrating and enthroning an openly confessed homosexual Gene Robinson as the bishop of New Hampshire Diocese in the Anglican Communion, and with any other province that shall follow suit.”

  18. Lambeth Conference 1988 Resolution 72 Episcopal responsibilities and diocesan boundaries; Lambeth Conference 1998 Resolution III.2 The Unity of the Anglican Communion – reproduced in Appendix Three/4.

  19. i.e. the twelfth meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council

  20. Resolution 34 Province-wide and Communion-wide consultation, reproduced in Appendix Three/8.
  21. See, for example, the line of argument developed in the discursus 'Of Ceremonies' in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer.

  22. On the relation of communion and autonomy, see Section B : Fundamental Principles, paragraphs 67-96.

  23. For the work of the Inter-Anglican Theological and Doctrinal Commission, see http://www.aco.org/ecumenical/commissions/iatdc/index.cfm

  24. See paragraphs 53-62.

  25. Extended treatment of these themes can be found in Eames, ch.2, 14-24 and The Virginia Report: the report of the Inter-Anglican Theological and Doctrinal Commission (1997), ch.2.
  26. Lambeth Conference 1930 Resolution 49
    http://www.lambethconference.org/resolutions/1930/1930-49.cfm
  27. e.g. “The Church of Ireland will maintain communion with the sister Church of England”: Ireland, Constitution, Preamble and Declaration, III.
  28. e.g. “The Church of Nigeria shall be in full Communion with the See of Canterbury and with all dioceses, provinces and regional Churches which are in full Communion with the See of Canterbury:” Nigeria, Constitution, Chapter 1.3(1).
  29. e.g. “The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America ... is a constituent member of the Anglican Communion”, a fellowship of churches “in communion with the See of Canterbury”: ECUSA, Constitution, Preamble
  30. See paragraphs 36-39, 87-96.
  31. Women in the Anglican Episcopate: theology guidelines and practice, The Eames Commission and the Monitoring Group Reports, IV:57 (Toronto, 1998).
  32. See generally The Virginia Report and the work of the Inter-Anglican Theological and Doctrinal Commission (IATDC) which develop longstanding ideas enunciated by successive Lambeth Conferences.
  33. For analysis of the declarations of impaired communion, see N. Doe, 'Communion and Autonomy in Anglicanism: Nature and Maintenance', pp.20-24, Lambeth Commission website
  34. See Summary Argument from the IATDC's 'Communion Study', p.3; see also IARCCUM Sub-commission submission, p.18.
  35. This 'Quadrilateral' was first adopted by the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church (USA) meeting in synod in Chicago in 1886. It was subsequently adopted as a fundamental basis for ecumenical reconciliation in Resolution 11 of the Lambeth Conference 1888 – reproduced in Appendix Three/1.
  36. The Virginia Report, paragraph 3.25.
  37. See also Section D : The Maintenance of Communion, paragraphs 124-132.
  38. “We have seen that a Bishop's ministry is 'representative' in several different senses. A Bishop represents the local church to the wider, but also the other way round. Bishops represent Christ to the people, but also bring the people and their prayers to God. Finally, they often represent God and his Church in the world at large.” Dr Michael Nazir-Ali in Working with the Spirit: Choosing diocesan bishops, CHP (2001), p.107.
  39. 'Reflections offered to the Primates of the Anglican Communion by the Inter-Anglican Theological and Doctrinal Commission at the invitation of the Archbishop of Canterbury'. See http://www.aco.org/ministry/ecumenical/commissions/iatdc/docs/2003reflections.cfm
  40. R Runcie, Opening Address, reproduced in The Truth Shall Make You Free, The Lambeth Conference 1988, CHP (1988), p.16.
  41. Consideration of the process of reception is well developed in The Virginia Report, ch.4 'Levels of Communion - Subsidiarity and Interdependence' 4:14-4:21.
  42. Code of Canon Law, canon 331.
  43. Examples - see The Virginia Report 3.26, 3.27, 3.28.
  44. Lambeth Conference 1930, Resolution 48 on the principle of autonomy; Lambeth Conference 1978, Resolution 21.3 - recognises “the autonomy of each of its member Churches, acknowledging the legal right of each Church to make its own decision…”
  45. “The Churches represented [here] are indeed independent, but independent with the Christian freedom which recognises the restraints of truth and love. They are not free to deny the truth. They are not free to ignore the fellowship…”, Lambeth Conference 1920, SPCK (1920), Evangelical Letter, p.14.
  46. See The Virginia Report, ch.4.
  47. Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition, (Oxford 1989).
  48. South East Asia, Constitution, Fundamental Declarations, 5.
  49. In saying this, we are aware of course that, as a matter of civil law, a narrowly secular approach is likely to be adopted by the courts which would emphasise the strict legal autonomy of each church. See, for example, R v Ecclesiastical Commissioners of both Houses of Parliament ex parte The Church Society (1994), 6 Admin, LR 670.
  50. In paragraphs 38-39, 75-83.
  51. The Truth Shall Make You Free: The Lambeth Conference 1988 (London: CHP, 1988), 'Dogmatic and Pastoral Concerns', p.87(23).
  52. Lambeth Conference 1920, SPCK (1920), Evangelical Letter, p.14.
  53. See paragraphs 38-39, 77 and 83
  54. See The Virginia Report, ch.3, p.42.
  55. Thomas Cranmer, as the first Archbishop of the Reformation period and author of the first Book of Common Prayer, set the tone and provided the model for his successors as primus inter pares; the primacy within both the Church of England and within the wider Communion has always been essentially a “primacy of honour”.
  56. Although Archbishop Moore declined to consecrate Samuel Seabury himself for legal and political reasons, he considered Seabury's consecration by the Scottish Anglican Bishops in 1784 to be valid. Meanwhile, he pursued his own discussions with the English Government, enabling him to consecrate William White and Samuel Provoost as soon as the law had been changed in 1786. The story is helpfully described in PM Doll Revolution, Religion and National Identity (London 2000), ch.6.
  57. For a readable account of the developing Communion, see W.M. Jacob, The Making of the Anglican Church Worldwide, SPCK (1997). The earlier role of the Bishop of London (which had developed from the commercial expansion of the chartered companies of the City of London, and the work of their chaplains) was almost entirely eclipsed by the early nineteenth century
  58. .
  59. See AMG Stephenson, The First Lambeth Conference, SPCK (1967) especially ch.10; the Archbishop of York was the most prominent among those bishops who refused the summons to the 1867 Conference (for reasons based partly on Church-State issues, relating to questions about the status of the Conference as a “General Council”, in contravention of Article XXI).
  60. “It is remarkable to observe how Longley managed to be present at each of the events which proved to be milestones in the early history of 'pan-Anglicanism'” (p. 91). Stephenson contrasts Longley's 'pan-Anglicanism' with his predecessors' 'pan-Protestantism' (the latter could be illustrated by the passage some years earlier of the Jerusalem Bishopric Act 1841).
  61. For the full story, see Stephenson op cit chapter 11.
  62. 'Intercommunion' issues took up approximately half of the time the bishops spent together (see Stephenson, op cit ch.12).
  63. Their Resolutions covered the process of episcopal appointment, establishment of new sees, intercommunion, synodical authority, and doctrinal and geographical boundaries ; for the full text of these and other resolutions up to 1988, see R Coleman, Resolutions of the Twelve Lambeth Conferences 1867-1988 (Toronto, 1992).
  64. Lambeth Conference 1867, Resolution 9.
    http://www.lambethconference.org/resolutions/1867/1867-9.cfm
  65. In his letter of invitation, Longley had made clear (anticipating the Archbishop of York's misgivings) that “Such a Meeting would not be competent to make declarations, or lay down definitions on points of doctrine…” (See Stephenson, op cit p 188).
  66. Lambeth Conference 1867, Resolution 4. The meaning and intention of this statement have been the subject of continuing debates, up to the present
    http://www.lambethconference.org/resolutions/1867/1867-4.cfm
  67. O Chadwick, Introduction, in Resolutions of the Twelve Lambeth Conferences 1867-1988, ed, R Coleman, (Toronto 1992), p.xvii.
  68. Lambeth Conference 1897, Resolution 5.
    http://www.lambethconference.org/resolutions/1897/1897-5.cfm
  69. See Lambeth Conference 1908, Resolution 54, which defines the membership of the Consultative body, and Lambeth Conference 1920, Resolution 44, which makes clear that it is “a purely advisory body … and neither possesses nor claims any executive or administrative power; see also Lambeth Conference 1930, Resolution 50, Lambeth Conference 1948, Resolutions 80 and 81, and Lambeth Conference 1958, Resolution 61.
  70. Its Constitution defines its object as (inter alia) “…to advise on inter-Anglican, provincial and diocesan relationships…” (see Constitution Article 2(c), in The Communion We Share (Harrisburg, PA, 2000, p.23).
  71. Lambeth Conference 1978, Resolution 12
    http://www.lambethconference.org/resolutions/1978/1978-12.cfm
  72. Lambeth Conference 1978, Report, p123.
  73. Lambeth Conference 1988, Resolution 18.2(a), and Lambeth Conference 1998, Resolution III.6.
  74. Gomez, Drexel W & Sinclair, Maurice W, Ed. Carolton, TX: The Ekklesia Society, 2001.
  75. Commission's emphasis.
  76. See Lambeth Conference 1978, Resolution 11.
    http://www.lambethconference.org/resolutions/1978/1978-11.cfm
  77. Report of the Meeting of Primates of the Anglican Communion, International Study Centre, Canterbury, 10-17 April 2002
  78. The Network maintains a website: http://www.acclawnet.co.uk.
  79. See Appendix Three/10.
  80. Suggested form of law, for example: 'The Governing Body of the Church in Wales authorises the Archbishop of Wales to enter on behalf of this church the Anglican Covenant and commits the Church in Wales to comply and act in a manner compatible with the Covenant so entered'
  81. General Convention 2003, Resolution C051 (see Appendix Three/9).
  82. “… a Bishop's ministry is 'representative' in several different senses. A Bishop represents the local church to the wider, but also the other way round. Bishops represent Christ to the people, but also bring the people and their prayers to God. Finally, they often represent God and his Church in the world at large.” Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, 'Towards a theology of choosing bishops' in Working with the Spirit: Choosing diocesan bishops CHP (London 2001), p.107. See also, The Gift of Sexuality: A theological perspective, Report of the Theology Committee of the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church, offered for study and reflection by the House of Bishops, 18 March 2003, paragraph 7.1, http://arc.episcopalchurch.org/presiding-bishop/pdf/theologycomreport.pdf.
  83. A helpful recent summary of the process (by reference to the Church of England) may be found in Working with the Spirit: Choosing diocesan bishops, CHP (London, 2001).
  84. See N Doe, Canon Law in the Anglican Communion (Oxford 1998), pp.109-113.
  85. Because General Convention meets on a three-yearly cycle, if a bishop is elected more than three months before its next meeting, confirmation is dealt with by consent of a majority of the Standing Committees of the dioceses of the Episcopal Church (see ECUSA Constitution and Canons, Title III, Canon 21).
  86. There are Lambeth Conference resolutions on the subject of divorce and remarriage, but not relating to the issue of the ordination of divorcees.
  87. See paragraphs 12-21
  88. See Women in the Anglican Episcopate: theology guidelines and practice, The Eames Commission and the Monitoring Group Reports, IV:57 (Toronto, 1998).
  89. See Lambeth Conference 1998, Resolution 1.10, reproduced in Appendix Three/6
  90. See the Statement by the Primates of the Anglican Communion meeting in Lambeth Palace, 16 October 2003 (included in Appendix Three/10).
  91. We do not agree with the argument put to us in one submission, that the consecration was invalid since it was lacking in appropriate intention (see 'The current crisis in the Anglican Communion: What are the ecclesiological issues involved?')
  92. The Preamble to the ECUSA Constitution and Canons characterises the Church as “…a constituent member of the Anglican Communion…”
  93. See paragraphs 12-21 and 126 for the reasons why exceptional arrangements apply to women bishops.
  94. At the press conference on 16 October 2003 which followed the Primates' Meeting, the Archbishop of Canterbury said, in answer to a question, “It is also a fact that because of the present discipline of the Church of England, Gene Robinson would not be in a position to be received as a bishop here – to be licensed to exercise episcopal functions here.”
  95. See Some Issues in Human Sexuality (London, 2003)
  96. The resolution is reproduced in Appendix Three/8.
  97. Diocese of New Westminster Dialogue on Same Sex Unions, Report of the Legal and Canonical Commission, by George E H Cadman, QC (Chair), Linda Barry-Hollowell (Diocese of Calgary), Stephen J Toope (Diocese of Montreal), April 2001.
  98. In Service of Communion, Final Report of the General Synod Task Force on Jurisdiction to the Council of General Synod and the Canadian House of Bishops, February 2002
  99. Resolution A134 Blessing of Same Sex Unions - reproduced in Appendix Three/12.
  100. The Gift of Sexuality: A theological perspective, Report of the Theology Committee of the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church, offered for study and reflection by the House of Bishops, 18th March 2003, quotation from paragraphs 6.5 and 6.6 (see http://arc.episcopalchurch.org/presiding-bishop/pdf/theologycomreport.pdf).
  101. For example, Lambeth Conference 1998 Resolution 1.10 Human Sexuality; the statements of the Primates' Meetings in March 2000, May 2003 (quoted in paragraph 142) and October 2003 (see Appendix Three/10), and, on procedure, ACC-12 Resolution 34 Province-wide and Communion-wide consultation (see Appendix Three/8).
  102. True Union in the Body?, a paper commissioned by Archbishop Drexel Gomez, published privately and circulated at the Primates' Meeting in May 2003.
  103. Statement by the Primates of the Anglican Communion meeting in Lambeth Palace, 16 October 2003, reproduced in Appendix Three/10.
  104. The full resolution is included in Appendix Three/3.
  105. Caring for all the Churches: A response of the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church to an expressed need of the Church, March 2004, reproduced in Appendix Three/11.
  106. See, paragraph 155
  107. See The Virginia Report, ch.4.
  108. In view of the very grave difficulties encountered in the internal affairs of some provinces of the Communion, [this conference] invites the Archbishop of Canterbury to appoint a commission to make recommendations to the Primates and the Anglican Consultative Council, as to the exceptional circumstances and conditions under which, and the means by which, it would be appropriate for him to exercise an extraordinary ministry of episcope (pastoral oversight), support and reconciliation with regard to the internal affairs of a province other than his own for the sake of maintaining communion with the said province and between the said province and the rest of the Anglican Communion. (IV.13.b)