What happened at Newry?—An ACI Response
The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Primates indicated that a sufficient statement of regret/repentance had yet to be received from ECUSA, and that such needed to be forthcoming;
In terms of one Instrument of Unity (The Lambeth Conference) ECUSA’s status is currently ambiguous. It must consider its place within the Anglican Communion and, before it meets in 2008, signal that it is committed to the interdependent life of the Communion set out in the opening sections of the Windsor Report.
In terms of a second Instrument of Unity (The Anglican Consultative Council), which is the next Instrument to meet, ECUSA is asked to withdraw its members and not to participate for the period leading up to the Lambeth Conference, although the ACC are asked to invite it to send a group to explain its theological position on sexuality;
In terms of the third Instrument of Unity (The Primates’ Meeting), no announcement of a next meeting was made, and one can conclude that the kind of response ECUSA makes over the next period will be determinative in respect of its ongoing involvement;
It was clear from most reports that the Instrument of Unity which actually gathered outside of Newry, Ireland, this past week, the Primates Meeting, is already under severe strain, and that its normal patterns of functioning have been altered. This is partly due to the actions of provinces in North America (e.g., strained eucharistic fellowship) but also because it has acted in line with past Lambeth Resolutions and recommendations in the Windsor Report to take enhanced authority within the Communion and in relation to the other Instruments.
Given the seriousness with which the North American churches were treated at Newry, it was agreed that further extra-territorial incursions should not be encouraged or initiated by provinces or dioceses outside ECUSA or Canada;
However, a ‘panel of reference’ is to be formed as a matter of urgency, and Alternative Episcopal Oversight arrangements are to be considered for difficult circumstances in the ‘withdrawal’ region of North America. It is clear that in these two provinces it cannot now be ‘business as usual’ and we urge those Bishops in the ECUSA able to comply with The Windsor Report to avail themselves of this important development.
We further note that ECUSA was not ‘suspended’ (in a quasi-legal sense). Rather, consistent with arguments made by the ACI, ECUSA has by its own actions jeopardized its status as an invited member to Communion affairs, undertaken by the Instruments of Unity. It remains fully possible that the Archbishop of Canterbury would decide to withdraw invitation entirely, should the steps asked of ECUSA not be taken.
The Anglican Communion Institute
26 February 2005
