BREAKING: Synod passes amended ACNA motion

I’ll have more to say soon about General Synod’s passage of the ACNA motion as amended. My quick comment is that Synod displayed a shocking lack of awareness of what this would mean in the US. They also seem to live in a cloud of ignorance about what’s coming their way when secessionists move into London.

According to the Church Times blog, here’s the final text as passed by General Synod:

That this Synod, aware of the distress cause by recent divisions within the Anglican churches of the United States of America and Canada,

(a) recognise and affirm the desire of those who have formed the Anglican Church in North America to remain within the Anglican family;

(b) 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

(c) invite the Archbishops to report further to the Synod in 2011.

Stay tuned. Meanwhile, you can follow things at The Lead. I’m sure Thinking Anglicans will have something soon.

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. Daniel says:

    While this certainly isn’t a great resolution, I have to admit that a punt was better than I’d hoped for. I feel that on this issue time is on our side. The longer things take (or gets kicked down the road) and the more accepting people become the less of an issue much of this is going to be. Plus, the longer ACNA has to try to stick together, the more likely the clash of egos and different theology will tear them apart. It would seem this was better than what could have happened too us.

  2. Bill Carroll says:

    The strategy of amending the resolution in this way and waiting makes sense if one is convinced that a relatively high probability exists that the unamended resolution might pass. Is synod being unnecessarily risk averse? Or is there a real chance that something this foolish might pass?

    If the latter, it might be a wise punt. It certainly shouldn’t be read as an endorsement of ACNA, though some who voted for the resolution would be happy to do it. All it does is to acknowledge an aspiration.

    I myself would have voted for the amendment and against the resolution.

  3. A Church of England Anglo-Catholic Canon once said of the 39 Articles “I assent to the 39 Articles as I assent to the Oxford Gas Works. I am aware of their existence, I am at the present moment engaged in no active plan for their destruction, but it does not mean I approve of them.” This surely is the tone in which the Synod’s vote should be taken re ACNA.

  4. Scott says:

    Sounds like a punt to me, too…but why do the opening lines of Hamlet come to mind?