Anglican Communion Institute (ACI)

A Reply to Bishop Sauls

With Bishop Sauls' lengthy and considered review of the canonical irregularities in the cases of Bishops Cox and Schofield, we can now assume that the leadership of The Episcopal Church has made the best case that can be made in defense of these actions. But a review of Bishop Sauls' memorandum shows that one cannot defend the indefensible. His analysis studiously avoids addressing the controlling issues. He extols safeguards that were not followed in these very cases.

"Come, Let Us Reason Together" -- The Future of a Useful Covenant

One concern about the covenant process now underway is that the reality of the Communion's present condition could be bypassed by well-intentioned efforts of a committee to hear everyone and find a common document that proves unable to address a reality.

We are in a crisis. Unless someone can offer facts to the contrary, there is only one way for an Anglican Communion to remain in place, and no real alternatives to that. Indeed this was the Archbishop of Canterbury's own stated assumption from the very beginning as he sought to address the crisis before us.

Addendum in light of the Presiding Bishop's April 30, 2008 Letter to the House of Bishops:

  A defense now proffered by the Presiding Bishop and her supporters is that the same procedures were followed in the recent cases of Bishops Davies and Moreno.  Past violations of the canon's clear provisions are said to justify current ones.  In considering this defense, it is necessary to distinguish three senses of "precedent" in legal usage.   One is the well-known sense of precedent as a formal ruling on a legal issue by a competent juridical body.  This is clearly not the case here as no one has suggested that the prior cases were determined to be canonical by any body reviewing the

Presentment Memorandum


                    


MEMORANDUM TO:  Working Group                         April 21, 2008

                         FROM:  [Redacted]

                                RE:  Canonical Violations


The Presiding Bishop of TEC: Does She Know What She Is Doing?

Three events in the recent past have posed a serious question.  Does the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church (TEC) know what she is doing?  The possible answers to this question have raised even greater concern than the question itself. For, I have concluded, if, on the one hand, she does not know what she is doing then TEC is without effective leadership at perhaps the most crucial time in its history.  If, on the other hand, she does know what she is doing, she is leading TEC in directions for which she has no warrant.

An Easter Sermon

Easter Sermon Wycliffe College, Toronto
26 March 2008


Because of its reflective character, John's Gospel dwells on details and lets them speak in ways the other Gospels' proximity and excitement sometimes prevents. The beloved disciple is "he who remains," abides, literally leans on Jesus, and remaining is a key word in this Gospel. Because remaining allows one the space, the time, even the awkwardness of inaction, to discern and believe.

A Good Friday Reflection

[Editor's note: This is the first of a series of three reflections by Dr. Seitz.]
Good Friday Service

St Matthews Anglican Church
Toronto21 March 2008  The Revd Christopher Seitz 

John 18:1-27

"And when he said to them 'I am He' they drew back and fell to the ground."

A Reflection on John 18:28"”19:16

[Editor's note: This is the second of a series of three reflections by Dr. Seitz.]
John 18:28-19:16

"Pilate said to him, 'What is truth?'"


With what deep irony does John report the transfer of Jesus from Caiaphas to Pilate. The Jews do not enter the Roman governmental headquarters for fear of defilement-in accordance with the law-and so do not hear the words they need to hear, and never will hear. Unless, like us, at a later day through this account from John.
Subscribe to Anglican Communion Institute (ACI)

twittersound cloudyoutubeinstagram