HOPE across the Anglican Communion cannot grow without trust, but trust is fragile, the Archbishop of Canterbury said on Sunday.
She was addressing the 19th global Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), of which she is president, meeting in Belfast (News, 26 June).
“Across our Communion, there is no shortage of passion, conviction, or commitment,” she said. “In some places, it [trust] has been wounded. In others it has been tested by distance, misunderstanding, or disappointment. We cannot simply vote trust into existence, nor can we create hope through anxiety, fear, or urgency.”
She continued: “There are matters before us and matters that will come before us in the years ahead on which faithful Anglicans hold differing convictions. We should not be afraid of those conversations. But neither should we imagine that structural decisions alone can heal what is relational and spiritual.
“Lasting unity is built by trust.”
A large proportion of the nine-day meeting, which concludes on Sunday, has been dedicated to the Nairobi-Cairo proposals from the Inter-Anglican Standing Committee on Unity, Faith and Order (IASCUFO) for changes to the structure and leadership of the Anglican Communion (News, 16 March; 19 June). Its face ought not to be that of the Church of England, these suggest, and the position of the Archbishop of Canterbury as president “is no longer helpful”.
NEIL TURNER/ACOThe chairman of IASCUFO, the Rt Revd Graham Tomlin, addresses the session on their Nairobi-Cairo Proposals on day two of the conference
The proposals would mean that leadership would be delegated to the Standing Committee of Primates from across the Communion, and the 42 churches no longer “in communion with the See of Canterbury” but having a “historic connection” with it.
The Archbishop had spoken about “the realities of our divisions . . . and of the need to create the conditions in which trust might grow and hope might flourish”, the former Bishop of Kensington Dr Graham Tomlin, who chairs IASCUFO, said during a presentation on Monday.
The proposals had been described as an “interim ecclesiology”, he said. “Not the final word, but an understanding of the Communion for this uncertain time. . . We don’t experience full communion with the See of Canterbury across the entire Communion. We experience more ‘broken’ communion, ‘impaired’ communion — language we’ve used from our discussions with our ecumenical partners.”
But the proposals were not suggesting a federal approach to relationships, he said. “Full communion is the goal. It’s in the DNA of the lifeblood of the Anglican family. We are called to hope of full communion with one another, even if we don’t experience it all.
“We recognise a universal regard and affection for the See of Canterbury across the Communion, the sense of debt to that See, even if we have different relationships with it. We recognise that vital personal, pastoral, and representative role of the Archbishop of Canterbury within the Communion and ecumenically, yet we recognise the Anglican Communion is different now from what it was 100 years ago.”
NEIL TURNER/ACOThe Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of Armagh, the Most Revd John McDowell, during the opening service at St Anne’s Cathedral, Belfast
The expectation that the Churches of the Communion would become “less and less Anglican, by which they mean less and less English in character”, had “been with us for over a century . . . as far back as the Lambeth Conference of 1920”, the Dean of St Davids, the Very Revd Sarah Rowland-Jones, who is vice-chair of IASCUFO, suggested.
“They talked then with great joy about about how churches that had been founded by missions in India, China, and elsewhere were actually now being led by their own people, and less and less like an English export,” she said.
“That was the background to resolution 49 from the 1930 Lambeth conference [on the nature and status of the Anglican Communion]. It’s more accurate to talk about it being a description, not a definition. They weren’t intending it to be a fixed definition for decades, even a century to come.”
She continued: “We’ve recognised, since the Toronto Congress in 1963, that that sort of great and glorious sense of full communion has had wrinkles in it. The language of working together, living as far and as fully as we can in degrees of communion to the utmost has been with us for many decades. . .
“That language has given us an elasticity to be generous with one another in our differences and still to walk together; that sense of being brothers and sisters within the family of Anglicanism. To those who would say, if you haven’t got full eucharistic communion, you’ve got no communion at all — that’s codswallop. We’re far further down the track than that.”
Canon Andrew Khoo, of the Province of South East Asia, suggested that the phrase “in communion with the See of Canterbury” had made it sound as if the Church of England was the gateway to membership — and perhaps it was, he said, in 1930.
“But as independence comes to different parts of the world and the British Commonwealth, things begin to change,” he continued. “Already at the next conference, the ecclesiology is less centred around the Church of England. It was still somewhat an imperial ecclesiology, but needing to adapt and to evolve in response to new provinces being created and new countries being independent.”
By 1968, “the Communion is postcolonial and becomes more and more so with each passing year. The See of Canterbury is a touchstone for Anglicans, but not necessarily a focus of unity. The ministry of the Archbishop of Canterbury is something that is precious . . . it’s a gift, and indeed an instrument of unity, but it is something that needs to be received as well, not just given.”
He concluded: “Communion has in no way been given up. We’re not saying there will be no communion; however, we do realise we have to say what is essential to us, especially when a majority of our members are telling us they have problems of agreement about important matters of communion and membership. We can’t simply wish them away.”
The meeting is to have further substantive discussions on Tuesday and Thursday this week. Resolutions are be brought on Saturday — the final day. IASCUFO is to publish a “supplement” to the proposals in the days ahead, and promises the release of more information in the coming months.
NEIL TURNER/ACOThe Dean of St Davids Cathedral, and a member of IASCUFO, the Very Revd Dr Sarah Rowland Jones, addresses the session on their Nairobi-Cairo Proposals on day two of the conference
The Archbishop in Jerusalem, Dr Hosam Naoum, described the meeting, in an opening address, as taking place during a moment of profound uncertainty in the world. “Around us, we witness growing polarisation, economic hardship, forced migration, and environmental crises, and an erosion of trust between peoples and nations,” he said.
He spoke of the “dangerous escalation” of the military confrontation between Iran, Israel, and the United States. “The consequences reached far beyond national borders. Missiles crossed skies that connect dioceses. Fear entered homes, churches, hospitals, and schools.”
Hope was about “presence and resilience in our risen Lord”, he said. “Hope is the daily decision to continue serving Christ, even when circumstances tempt us to give up. Hope is a doctor treating patients despite such shortages. Hope is a teacher opening a classroom after another difficult night. Hope is the priest celebrating the Eucharist with a small congregation determined to continue and to remain.”
Dr Nouam, with young peacemakers, was due to host a dialogue on Wednesday evening, on the theme “A Living Legacy: Young voices on the work of peace”.