Well, CANA’s website is up and running. Click HERE to see it. CANA, you may remember, is the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, a subsidiary of the Church of Nigeria.
The bishop elect of CANA, Canon Martyn Minns, is to be ordained on the 20th of August. His election has given rise to a rather complex and convoluted set of issues about jurisdiction and the place from which Minns is to exercise ministry. It would appear that he is staying close to home, namely his current parish in Virignia. The mailing address for the CANA office is in Fairfax.
The Church of Nigeria website states that “Some Anglicans from the convocation and other churches in the US still in communion with Nigeria will be attending the consecration in Abuja.” The sense of this is that there are already “convocation” individuals or churches and there are “other” churches in the US “still in communion” with Nigeria. It will be interesting to see who attends and if there are American bishops taking part in the consecration.
The Website lists as “affiliates” of CANA the Church of Nigeria and the Archbishop of Canterbury. It’s an odd use of the word, and an odd paring of two distinctly different entities – one a Church and the other the holder of a position in a church. CANA is not an “affiliate” of Nigeria, it is a subsidiary diocese within the Church of Nigeria. CANA is no an “affiliate” of the Archbishop of Canterbury. It may well have the ABC as a supporter, a patron or whatever, but I suspect not.
For all the spiffiness of the website it is still seems mostly like ecclesial slight of hand. I suppose we will have to see who goes to the consecration and who chooses to affiliate with CANA and why. The wide range of small fragments in the disaffected and now realignment movement is now one wider and the list of “Anglican but not Episcopal” churches in the US is increased by one.
I would hope the Archbishop of Canterbury could at least state that he is not indeed in any way affiliated with the Convocation of Anglicans in North America. He needs to speak up, NOW.
8/13/2006
6 comments:
OK... Comments, gripes, etc welcomed, but with some cautions and one rule:
Cautions: Calling people fools, idiots, etc, will be reason to bounce your comment. Keeping in mind that in the struggles it is difficult enough to try to respect opponents, we should at least try.
Rule: PLEASE DO NOT SIGN OFF AS ANONYMOUS: BEGIN OR END THE MESSAGE WITH A NAME - ANY NAME. ANONYMOUS commentary will be cut.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think it is very hard to understand where the archbishop is either standing or going. The silence from Canterbury combined with the amazing actions of +Tom Wright make it look from here that he has completely caved to the right. I hope I am wrong.
ReplyDeleteFWIW
jimB
The mailing address for CANA is not only in Fairfax -- it's the address of Truro Church (formerly known as Truro Episcopal Church) in Fairfax, where Martyn Minns is (as of now, anyway) rector.
ReplyDeleteHmm. I wonder what Truro Church is going to 'discern' in their '40 Days of Discernment' about their affiliation? Clearly they're wide open to every possibility.
Based upon recent actions (e.g. sending +Wright to Texas to "educate" the "Windsor bishops"), I wouldn't hold my breath on +++Williams doing anything that isn't beneficial for the Anglican rightwing.
ReplyDeleteTEC has been sold down the river by +++Canterbury and +++York. Would that our new PB-elect head to merry olde England and get tough with these invading foreign prelates, but I'm skeptical...
IMHO, it's time to shake the dust of the AC off our sandals and move on. This has been tying up our time & energy for far too long...
"IMHO, it's time to shake the dust of the AC off our sandals and move on. This has been tying up our time & energy for far too long..."
ReplyDeleteWell said, and I quite agree. The hubris in CANA's statement is just staggering.
David Huff wrote:
ReplyDelete'IMHO, it's time to shake the dust of the AC off our sandals and move on. This has been tying up our time & energy for far too long... '
On the one hand, I have to agree that yes, all of this bickering has been nothing but a dispiriting drain of energy and resources.
On the other hand, I think it is vital to maintain ties with Anglican Christians in other parts of the world. Whether we call this 'Communion' or not, whether it is formally recognised by any jurisdiction, is not important.
A conversation with Esther Mombo of Kenya last month indicated to me that ++Akinola is not Africa, and most African Anglicans are fairly unhappy with his words and actions. As one of the authors of Windsor, Dr Mombo was appalled by the poor process from which that report was spawned.
Progressive and moderate Anglicans have friends all over the world. The effort to remain in communion with them is more than worthwhile.
Wendy wrote, "On the other hand, I think it is vital to maintain ties with Anglican Christians in other parts of the world. Whether we call this 'Communion' or not, whether it is formally recognised by any jurisdiction, is not important."
ReplyDeleteI agree completely. I just don't see the AC as that body any longer.
But I'm all for maintaining ties to the church in Canada, Scotland, Wales, (most of) England, Southern Africa, Japan, Australia (minus Sydney, I'd assume), etc...