Comments on The Windsor Report
to the Anglican Communion
by The Rt. Rev. H.W. Shipps

Commissioned by the Archbishop of Canterbury in October of 2003, the long-awaited report from the international commission on Anglican unity, chaired by Archbishop Robin Eames, Primate of Ireland, was presented to the Archbishop Rowan Williams last fall. It is now being studied throughout the Anglican Communion and presented to several levels of national and international authority for response. The commission was composed of 17 members, clergy & laity, men & women, with one member of ECUSA. 

Included in the Report is an excellent study on Scripture, its primacy, its authority and its interpretation relative to the unity of the Church. There is an analysis of what it means to be “in communion” (koinonia) with its responsibilities, asking “what is the nature of the Communion we share?” and our obligations and corresponding rights. 

There is considerable discussion of the meaning and use of six catagories:

Adiaphora, that which is of secondary importance. How is secondary determined?

Subsidiarity, governance at the lowest level possible.  What issues are secondary or tertiary?

Autonomy, self governing (autocephalous). But to what degree are Anglican provinces autonomous? How much is beneficial? See I Cor. 5 & 6.

Reception. This is the process by which a major new issue or practice is or is not accepted by the whole Church over time, for example the ordination of women bishops. Reception does not mean that a province can put forth an unorthodox development merely to test reception. How much time and by how much of the Church validates consensus fidelium?

Trust and Authority are discussed in the context of fellowship (koinonia).

Both are “in relationship to others”. 

The understanding of historic Christian theological developments (ex. remarriage after divorce) with mutual discernment and common goals is explored. An appendix of previous Anglican studies and reports, often forgotten or ignored, is included along with a thematic index.  

The 95 page Report has been received the thirty-eight archbishops and primates of the worldwide Anglican provinces. There are seventy-seven million of us in 164 nations. Many hail the report as a way forward. Others say the Report does not go far enough to correct present discord. The Report suggests how Anglicans can maintain unity and communion given major differences in faith and morals within a particular province but primarily between provinces in the rapidly growing Southern hemisphere and the older dioceses in Europe and North America.   

The question now to be resolved is how much diversity in orthodox faith and practice is tolerable within a very diverse worldwide Communion, the third largest in Christendom. I say communion because we are not one Church but a collection of 38 Provinces in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury and thereby in communion with each other. To my knowledge The Episcopal Church USA had no canonical references to membership in an Anglican Communion until the 1950’s when such addition was made as a Preamble to our Constitution. Each of the 38 Provinces, ECUSA being but one, are autonomous and many are convinced they should remain fully so, each reflecting its own culture. Please note the Report does not discuss the issue of sexuality itself. 

The crisis has come about as a result of the 2003 General Convention of ECUSA wherein consent was given for the consecration of a bishop who has been divorced and is now living in a homosexual relation with a companion. The General Convention also noted that blessings of same sex unions were “within the bounds of our common life” (The Canadian church made a similar declaration along with the diocese of New Westminster). Because of ECUSA actions, a number of archbishops and bishops have announced that they are in a state of impaired or non-communion with ECUSA or with those bishops who participated in the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire. Some Provinces now refuse financial support from ECUSA or ECUSA parishes. Some bishops will refuse to participate in meetings if any of these same American bishops are present. Some have even asked for the expulsion of ECUSA from the Anglican Communion (there is no such process). 

Ecumenical The very negative response has come from the Roman Catholic Church, ”new and serious difficulties”, Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox Churches have condemned the ECUSA initiative. Our companion church, the ELCA, will consider its commission report on this subject this summer. 

How can we resolve this estrangement? The Report speaks of strengthening the so called ‘instruments of unity’ for guidance to the provinces in order to forestall any future actions that will impair our unity.

A few of the highlights follow. 

The Archbishop of Canterbury is first among equals and presides at inter-Anglican functions. The suggestion is that he be given greater arbitration authority and that he be provided with a ‘Council of Advice” drawn from the membership of the ACC and the Primates. This would strengthen the Archbishop’s responses and provide greater authenticity. 

The Lambeth Conference is a month long gathering of all active bishops worldwide in Canterbury at the personal invitation of the Archbishop. It meets every ten years on the 8^th year since 1888. Presently the resolutions and teachings are advisory not obligatory but carry much weight. The Report suggests that the Conference label some resolutions as “significant” and thereby be upgraded as ‘definitive teaching’ for all. Others feel that this would centralize too much authority (Rome, akkk!). (I attended Lambeth 1988. Bishop Louttit attended Lambeth ’98) 

The Primates Meeting is of more recent origin, 1978. This smaller group of prelates, archbishops/presiding bishops from each province, meets every two years, at the least, for consultation and to further coherence.  Could this group be given greater responsibility for monitoring new developments and serve as Standing Committee of the Lambeth Conference while also meeting more frequently? 

The Anglican Consultative Council, established in 1968, is a gathering of 65 bishops, priests and laypersons meeting every two or three years. Depending on size, each Province is represented by one, two or three persons. Theological statements and studies are issued for the Provinces to inform and consider. It is the only “Instrument” that has clergy and lay membership. This is the group responsible for obtaining funds to finance all of the above meetings and  programs! (Ask me about the “Compass Rose Society”) 

The Anglican Communion Office Located in London, this office, headed for the past ten years by my good friend The Rev’d Canon John L. Peterson, coordinates and plans the work of these four ‘Instruments of Unity’. How can this office carry on a more comprehensive ministry as secretariat to the whole Communion? A rethinking of its “strategic role” is requested in the Report along with staffing and funding, both insufficient. Presently limited funding comes on a pro-rated basis from each province and from the Compass Rose Society. 

Additional considerations for resolving future dilemmas

1.     Bishops.  How do the differing systems of electing/appointing bishops from Province to Province affect our unity? A bishop is for the whole Church not just the diocese. Does the ordination of women bishops in some Provinces and not in others affect our unity? The Ordinal says the bishop is to “guard the faith, unity and discipline of the Church” and to be a “wholesome example”. A divorced and remarried bishop is “unthinkable” in some provinces.

2.     A proposed Covenant for the Provinces to consider is provided in the Report. The need is termed “overwhelming”. It is a series of 27 Articles that would bind each Province together in a relationship that would make for a more unified and coordinated faith and practice, mission and ministry. Unilateral breaches would be avoided. To become effective, each Province would have to ratify the Covenant, or an amended one, through its own internal legislative process, General Convention in our case.

3.     What are Anglican principles for canon law? Can not the 38 sets of  Provincial canons be made more uniform and promote greater commonality amongst the Provinces? 

Remedying the Current Situation caused by the unilateral action of ECUSA, the Report suggests the following,

1.     The Episcopal Church be “invited to express regret” for its actions and expressing a desire to remain in the Communion by not breeching trust again. How strong is “invited”? What constitutes “regret”?

2.     That those bishops who took part in the consecration in NH “be invited to consider….whether they should withdraw themselves from representative functions in the Anglican Communion”.

3.     That the Episcopal Church “be invited to effect a moratorium” on any similar future action.

4.     The Episcopal Church is particularly requested to explain its actions and give accountability in the context of a mutual “listening process”. (for example, Lambeth 1998 resolutions on sexuality and our own House of Bishops Theology Commission report were both ignored by the House of Bishops)

5.     That there be a “moratorium on all public rites” of blessing same sex unions and that the bishops who so authorized them be “invited” to withdraw from international representative functions. 

Care of Dissenting Groups within a Province.

1.     The Report supports (“entirely reasonable”) the role of selected visiting bishops to provide delegated pastoral and sacramental oversight to congregations “aggrieved, estranged or isolated”. Such bishops should be invited by the local bishop, come from within the same Province and likely be retired bishops. C of E has “flying bishops” for those parishes who dissent from women priests and the bishops who ordain women priests. (A somewhat similar provision was adopted by the ECUSA bishops last year).

2.     The report calls upon those bishops who have intervened in provinces other than their own and without proper invitation, a) express regret for their actions, b) affirm their desire to remain in the Communion (not do it again) and c) effect a moratorium on any future interventions. This supports the Catholic principle (Council of Nicaea) of the integrity of a diocese with its bishop. 

Conclusion This Report will be considered at many levels, local, provincial and international, for review and response. The Report concludes, “There remains a very real danger that we will not choose to walk together”. If extreme measures for order fail, such as non-invitation or observer status only for some provinces or “withdrawal from membership” in the Communion, the report states “we will have to begin to learn to walk apart”.

The challenge is to “make every effort to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” (Ephesians 4:3)   

My brothers and sisters, pray daily for the peace and unity of the Church. Permit me to say, we might all be well advised to consider the difference between the justification of one’s position and reconciliation. Only reconciliation is Christ-like and a sacrament. 

+H W Shipps, Savannah, GA
Feb. 2005