Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Comment by Craig Goodrich

From TitusOneNine, comment #22 by Craig Goodrich on the "Archbishop Peter Akinola: A STATEMENT ON THE RESPONSE OF TEC TO THE DAR ES SALAAM COMMUNIQUÉ" thread [boldface mine]:

We need to be clear, ourselves, what we mean by “schism”—I believe schism within ECUSA—815 vs Common Cause, though CC will be bringing in non-ECUSA Anglicans—is inevitable, and is probably occurring as we type. Schism within the Communion—Canterbury vs the Global South—is avoidable and depends entirely on +++Rowan’s willingness to support disciplining 815 in a serious, meaningful way while recognizing Common Cause.

Note that South Africa has just chosen a Primate who intends to move his church closer to the Global South. ++Aspinall, a moderate liberal in a mostly-liberal province (aside from Sydney), has had it with 815’s semantic games and childish hair-splitting. +Scott-Joynt claims that if push comes to shove, 60% of C of E bishops will boycott Lambeth if ECUSA attends. The DeS Communique was unanimous and utterly unambiguous to anyone but David Booth Beers.

I doubt very much that +++Rowan will go along with Canon Kearon and his patrons at 815 much longer; there’s too much at stake.

I agree with Craig's distinction between schism within ECUSA and schism within the Communion. I only hope his conclusion is correct!

No comments: