Hello.
This blog that I love very much is now an ex-blog... sort-of... it continues over at revdlesley.net. Please do come and join the conversation there.
Lesley x

Saturday, 11 December 2010

Bishop of Gloucester - the Indaba Process #nocovenant



Michael Perham, Bishop of Gloucester, spoke about the Anglican Covenant at the November 2010 General Synod. This audio recordings are available here. It is fascinating - offering an alternative to the Covenant that I think we could all back wholeheartedly. Below is my transcription of the Bishop's speech which is about 1:45 into the recording:

I’m one of those who will vote for the motion - with some reluctance. Reluctance because I do fear, despite assurances, that a Covenant could eventually be used in a punitive manner against fellow Anglicans, as well as because of the most general worry that a Covenant may alter the kind of church we are.
Nevertheless, I will vote for the motion for two connected reasons. First, that not to do so is to make more difficult the task of the Archbishop of Canterbury in his ministry to the Communion and I want us to strengthen and not weaken his hand. Second, that the Covenant process keeps us talking, keeps us all in Communion through challenging times. The process helps even if we fear the final outcome. What I really hope is that when we eventually reach the point when it is poised to come into force we shall look at one another and say, ‘What’s this for? We have no need of it.’ And one of the reasons that I hope that this is the outcome is the continued ‘Indaba process’.
At the Lambeth Conference two years ago, I felt led to try to form a triangular partnership involving my diocese and two others in very different cultures. What emerged was, is, a partnership with the Diocese of Western Tanganyika in Tanzania which is what you might call black, conservative evangelical, its Bishop had also been to GAFCON and with the Diocese of El Camino Real in California, mainly white, though with a significant Latino minority, liberal, inclusive, fairly typical of The Episcopal Church, its bishop one of the few women Diocesans in the Communion. 
In the two years since, representatives of our three dioceses have spent quality time together in all three countries, prayed together, done Lectio Divina together, explored theological and ethical issues together, eaten together, gone on pilgrimage together. There have been some extraordinary moments of grace; the reception Bishop Mary received in an African Diocese who had never seen a woman Deacon, let alone a Bishop. The meeting in California of Africans with Lesbian and Gay people, listening, developing relationships, learning to respect and to see Christian authenticity in people whose interpretations of scripture and tradition is different from our own. We did not set out to change opinions, but change is what we have experienced, change, transformation, in ourselves and others. And now our triangular partnership has become one of six sets of triangular partnerships, participating in pilot schemes to do something similar across the Communion.
The Communions’ Continuing Indaba Project has a wider intention than we have had. It is to get each set of three to explore together shared mission priorities, but at the heart of it remains the building of relationship, trust and love that can hold the Communion together and deepen our unity. My hope is that we shall model something that will provide a pattern for such relationships, involving as many dioceses as are willing to take part. My regret is that we did not do it ten years ago. We might be too late, I pray not. I have as much confidence long term in continuing Indaba as in the Covenant for which I am going to vote today.
Share This:

6 comments:

Bruce Robison said...

Phil Turner has a very thoughtful piece this week on the Anglican Communion Institute website to address questions about the nature of Communion and, I think, about the concerns related to "discipline" or "punishment" in the context of dissent.

http://www.anglicancommunioninstitute.com/2010/12/unity-order-and-dissent-on-how-to-dissent-within-a-communion-of-churches/

The question I guess is whether when we talk about Communion we mean a fellowship of independent national churches who talk together from time to time about issues of common interest and concern and who share some resources for social mission or a deeply integrated body committed to a mutual recognition and intimacy through a deep sharing of faith, order, and worship.

But anyway, I think Dr. Turner's essay raises interesting questions by seeing the current dis-integration of the Communion through the lens of the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S. and the larger philosophical tradition of nonviolent resistence and civil disobedience.

All Advent blessings, Lesley--

Bruce Robison

Lesley said...

Blimey - he is a bit hard core.. these are brothers and sisters in Christ who simply disagree..

Do you agree with Jonathan Clatworthy?

Nick said...

I get tired of the over reliance on terms such as conservative and liberal... because it sometimes seems those two expressions of how we live out our faith become more important to people than the faith itself.

I have seen people from both ends of the spectrum proclaim their world view on moral values above their beliefs and I believe it can be quite detrimental to the Church as a whole.

I've always tried to live my own life (as in my attitudes towards they way I live), along a conservative angle because I feel that is right for me... but I've never expected or demanded that of others and my attitude towards them is liberal.

I believe we come to God equally as broken beings in need of his divine grace... and that he takes us as he finds us. I also believe it's only a relationship with him that enables us to grow and be changed. So I find it particularly harsh and hurtful when I see right wing Americans trying to push a conservative agenda on people who have nothing to gain from it.

You cannot be righteous without grace... and there is no benefit to trying to live righteously if we are not in receipt of that grace... so how can they justify trying to make people live righteously if they will not receive any benefit.

All it does is harden hearts against the gospel message. It is straining out gnats and swallowing camels and making others twice the sons of Hell that living with such an attitude would make us.

It is the Holy Spirit that calls people to righteousness and enables them to walk that path. Our primary goal should be ensuring people have access to the Spirit... and trusting in God's guidance in the lives of others.

So that's my long-winded way of saying I try to equally shun the notions of conservative and liberal. I try to treat those two imposters just the same.

Erika Baker said...

Nick
But living conservatively yet allowing others their own path IS what being liberal is about.

Too often we make the mistake of confusing "liberal" with "left wing". And it's not doing the idea of genuine liberalism any good at all.

Nick said...

I'm afraid I disagree with that analysis Erika.

That may very well be a position you yourself hold... and others around you, but it would be dangerous to assume that one definition of liberalism is the only definition of liberalism about... just as it's dangerous to assume all Christians believe exactly the same thing.

We should never ever confuse liberty with licence (a topic I keep meaning to blog on but keep skipping).

I'll agree with you on the confusion between left and liberal. That error has been around for ages because people define their politics on the left/right scale... and liberalism and authoritarianism are not logged separately.

A lot of people don't actually know what their own politics are and there seems to have been a rather daft assumption in the UK (and I'll admit for a while, in my teens and early 20's I made the same error), that Labour is left, Tories are Right and and Lib Dems are in the middle. In fact the Lib Dems economically speaking are quite right wing... it's their social policies that give them their name.

I personally believe everyone should take a test akin to that found on the political compass website... it's very educational. If you know your own position on the political scale, even if you don't know all the issues, you can see how closely aligned you are with the other parties.

I used to think that I was centrist... but I've since discovered that I'm largely left wing with a slight inclination towards liberalism (charts me around the same rough territory as Mandela).

Erika Baker said...

Nick,
yes, that is one of the huge problems we have, that words not only become labels with a life of their own but that different people use them in different ways.

Words like bible believing, orthodox, liberal etc have come have so many multiple meanings that you need to know who speaks them and in which context to begin to get an idea of what they might mean in this particular case.

But I would still say that in a Christian context we have to be careful.

We have liberals who absolutely insist that women have to be bishops and that no concessions are made to anyone who finds that impossible to stomach.
And we have liberals who insist that women have to be bishops but that there is no reason not to respect the right of traditionalists to have a women priest free church, provided no actual women are harmed in the process.

To my mind, the first are simply politically left, the second are truly liberal.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...