Questa conversazione è attualmente segnalata come "addormentata"—l'ultimo messaggio è più vecchio di 90 giorni. Puoi rianimarla postando una risposta.
1cjbanning
“That this Synod aware of the distress caused by recent divisions within the Anglican churches of the United States of America, recognize and affirm the desire of those who have formed the Anglican church in North America (ACNA) to remain within the Anglican family; acknowledge that this aspiration, in respect both of relations with the Church of England and membership of the Anglican Communion, raises issues which the relevant authorities of each need to explore further; and invite the Archbishops to report further to the Synod in 2011.”
http://www.churchnewsireland.org/news/acna-recognized-by-church-of-england-synod...
http://www.churchnewsireland.org/news/acna-recognized-by-church-of-england-synod...
2cjbanning
Simply Massing Priest analyses the resolution. "Not only does the motion not affirm ACNA as part of the Anglican Communion, the principles of law (after all, the CofE General Synod is a legislative body with powers delegated from the UK Parliament) suggest that the amended motion explicitly denies that ACNA has standing in the Anglican Communion. . . . So, while the resolution nicely acknowledges that the founders of ACNA want to be part of the Anglican Communion, it is actually pretty explicit that they are not." It was, of course, immediately clear to me on reading the resolution that the headline was, if not totally inaccurate, at least strongly misleading.
And Brian Lewis, who was there, characterizes the way the resolution played out as a "decision to reject the call to 'express a desire to be in Communion with ACNA'" in his account, here. "It was hardly surprising however that nobody objected to final amendment, an acknowledgement of the distress caused by recent divisions within the Anglican churches of the United States of America and Canada - indeed I had referred to it myself when calling on synod members to support those who had remained faithful to their church." So apparently CoE does have some sense that encouraging schism is not a good idea.
And Brian Lewis, who was there, characterizes the way the resolution played out as a "decision to reject the call to 'express a desire to be in Communion with ACNA'" in his account, here. "It was hardly surprising however that nobody objected to final amendment, an acknowledgement of the distress caused by recent divisions within the Anglican churches of the United States of America and Canada - indeed I had referred to it myself when calling on synod members to support those who had remained faithful to their church." So apparently CoE does have some sense that encouraging schism is not a good idea.
