Revisiting the Windsor Bishop's meeting #3

So, at the most 24 bishops, according to Stand Firm, have ever attended a "Windsor Bishops" meeting. At one time or another all 10 of the Network bishops have been there, leaving 14 non Network bishops. At this latest meeting 7 of the 17 were Network. So this time 10 other bishops were present.

This is not exactly an overwhelming crowd. Certainly it is a sizable minority of the House of Bishops diocesan bishops - 24 out of 110 - about 22%. But we must remember that 10 of these have already declared themselves the truly Windsor Compliant even though their Moderator has dismissed the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Lambeth Conference as being fatally flawed.

The Moderator has also said the Windsor Bishops are making a "last stand" at the House of Bishop's meeting in September.

In this context, and assuming that my information is correct, it is strange that the Archbishop of Canterbury sent an envoy to meet with them at Camp Allen.

First, I have heard nothing posted that says that Canon Cameron was at Camp Allen. Was he or wasn't he? An answer would be must helpful.

Helpful because I wonder just what is going on:

It would be of considerable interest to know if the so called "Windsor Bishops," are being advised by or are giving advice to the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Windsor Bishops got a bit of a play up in the Communique from Dar Es Salaam, where the "Camp Allen Principles" got mentioned in the text and footnoted at the end. Perhaps Canon Cameron was there as follow-up, to see if there are more "Principles" in play.

Perhaps he is there precisely to build them up as the sizable minority which the Network, by itself, is not. 24 beats 10 any day. Perhaps the Archbishop thinks that the Windsor Bishops represent a more centrists sort of group around which a temporary hold can be put on the possible fall out that might otherwise result from the House of Bishops meeting. He will be ill advised to think so.

But what IS going on? I believe, from a good source, that the Windsor Bishops Meeting #3 is considering advising the Archbishop on what he ought to stress in his discussion with the Bishops. It took a great deal to get the Archbishop to come to the HoB meeting at all. If he is guided in his thinking by the Camp Allen advice there will be great disappointment and considerable anger from a good portion of the 78% of the HoB diocesans who are not part of the Windsor bishops or the Network.


  1. Everywhere I look, I see the ABC truing to find the key to presuring TEC into accepting the bully's demands. The man seems to me to be as far from, 'greater love has no man than this....' as one can be.


  2. Or, jimB, he is listening to the Holy Spirit and doing what he is being called to do.

    Just a thought.

    Or does the Holy Spirit work at doing things at TEC's General Convention, and then only when it suits the liberal wing of the church?

    Another jim

  3. Seems that's a dangerous line for a Reasserter to be taking, Another jim, as it could lead to questions whether we in the "liberal wing" aren't doing what the Spirit asks of us, as well.

  4. Mark,

    I have never said that reappraisers didn't think they were doing what the Holy Spirit called them to do. I believe most sincerely believe that.
    For me though, using the guiding of the Holy Spirit with the Authority of Scripture, I simply believe they are not actually hearing the Holy Spirit. Likewise, I believe that is what reappraisers believe about us.
    That is why there needs to be an amicable divorce and a new or at least separate expression of Anglicanism in America.
    As an expression of a true Christian witness - on both sides - it would help if we would stop the ugly civil litigation against each other and come to a settlement.
    One of us is wrong, there are not two Holy Spirits. But I don't assume that the ABC, of all people, doesn't listen to the Holy Spirit, even when he disagrees with my view.
    That was my point.
    Just because you, or I, say we are doing what the Holy Spirit says, does not make it so.

    Another Jim

  5. The Living Church has a brief article on 16/8 which refers to 17 diocesan bishops being present with Canon Greg Cameron in attendance as well. I expect that will raise your hopes since it was only 17 - and such a small number couldnt possibly be right, right? It seems pretty insignificant compared with the ECUSA'n juggernaught, so I don't know why you'd be concerned in the least about what they're discussing.

    And isn't Greg Cameron pretty much on ECUSA's side in the AC anyway?

    I'd be more interested to know if the Holy Spirit was present with them and advising them actually, and whether He was giving any advice that was different to the last couple of GC's.

  6. The Windsor bishops are somewhat more of a worry to me than the alphabet soup bishops, because, as you have mentioned, Mark, I fear that, despite their small numbers, they will have undue influence.

    I'd like to know what they're up to, since my bishop is among their number.

    I already have my ticket to attend the ecumenical service in New Orleans on Sept. 20, where Abp. Williams will be the principal speaker. That should be interesting.


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.