In England, Anglican covenant debate reveals mixed expectations
Episcopal News Service. February 12, 2009 [021209-01]
Matthew Davies
Members of the Church of England's General Synod have signaled their overall support for an Anglican covenant but remain divided on how much authority or influence it should marshal in the communion's 38 provinces.
Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali of the Diocese of Rochester told the church's main legislative body February 12 that the covenant "is one way of ensuring that the common life of the communion is healthy and effective."
In the past, the Anglican Communion "has been held together by a common history, similar … ways of worship and the so-called 'bonds of affection,'" he said. "In a rapidly globalizing world and a fast-developing communion, these are no longer enough."
Nazir-Ali was introducing a motion that synod "do take note" of a Church of England report that responds to the latest draft (St. Andrew's Draft) of the Anglican covenant.
"The main purpose of the covenant is inclusion rather than exclusion," Nazir-Ali said. "We cannot forget, nevertheless, that these questions have arisen for us because of the need for adequate discipline in the communion on matters which affect everyone."
During a one-hour synod debate, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams disagreed with Nazir-Ali's position on the covenant. "We mustn't have excessive expectations of the covenant," Williams said, cautioning against it being a legal instrument. "It's part of an ongoing inquiry of what a global communion might look like. At every stage it is something which churches voluntarily are invited to enter into."
However, the Rev. Canon Chris Sugden of the Diocese of Oxford said he believes that the covenant should be "far more than an expression of fellowship," and instead be "a matter of legislation and a basis for governance."
Sugden, who is head of the conservative Anglican Mainstream group, noted that the primates, at their recent meeting in Alexandria, Egypt, had "welcomed the Covenant Design Group's intention to produce a covenant text that has a relational tone … in order to lead to the deepening of koinonia," a Greek word that refers to the relationships of communion.
"Could we also encourage the Covenant Design Group to help the communion to spell out this koinonia, and mutual accountability?" Sugden asked, questioning whether the covenant's purpose was "to maintain unity or to uphold the apostolic faith."
Appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the primates, the Covenant Design Group has been meeting since January 2007. So far, the group has produced two covenant drafts and the provinces of the Anglican Communion have until March 9 to respond to the St. Andrew's Draft.
The Covenant Design Group will meet again in April to discuss the responses and perhaps produce a third draft that will be presented to the Anglican Consultative Council, the communion's main legislative body, when it meets in Jamaica in May.
The idea for an Anglican covenant comes from the Windsor Report (paragraphs 113-120) and has been supported by all the instruments of communion as a way for the Anglican Communion to maintain unity amid differing viewpoints, especially on human sexuality issues and biblical interpretation.
At the primates meeting in Alexandria, Archbishop Phillip Aspinall of the Anglican Church of Australia said that there had been a "general warming" to the idea of a covenant, but acknowledged that there was "increasing realism" among the primates about what a covenant can and can't do. "We're probably pulling back from language about sanctions and teeth," he said. "If there is a failure in communion, then there needs to be more of an investment" in relationships.
Addressing synod on February 12, the Rev. John Plant of the Diocese of Leicester acknowledged the "significant improvement" in the text of the St. Andrew's Draft and commended Aspinall's comments about the covenant being "more relational." Plant raised his concerns about a covenant that is constitutional.
"The word 'relational' is not a weak word for a Christian," said Williams, acknowledging that relationship involves "sacrifice, thought, suffering, patience, learning, endurance. When the language 'relational' is used, it is not second best, it is a summons to deepening and intensifying our communion."
The Rev. Brian Lewis from the Diocese of Chelmsford also raised concerns about the covenant being legalistic, noting that had it been in existence two decades ago "it would have been used to argue against the ordination of women."
Lewis warned that the church is "not going to catch the imagination of our culture by handing over to the communion the decisions of which challenges we are able to face.
"Importing others' solutions -- whether they be from America or Nigeria -- simply won't do," he said.
In their responses to the St. Andrew's Draft, the provinces have been asked to provide answers to three questions:
- Is the province able to give an "in-principle" commitment to the covenant process at this time (without committing itself to the details of any text)?
- Is it possible to give some indication of any synodical process which would have to be undertaken to adopt the covenant in the fullness of time?
- In considering the St. Andrew's Draft for an Anglican covenant, are there any elements which would need extensive change in order to make the process of synodical adoption viable?
The Church of England report affirmed General Synod's "willingness to engage positively with a process designed to produce a covenant for the Anglican Communion and its wish for steps that will secure unity within the constraints of truth and charity and seek reconciliation within the communion."
The report also noted that "a resolution of the synod would suffice" in deciding whether the Church of England should "enter a covenant together with other churches of the Anglican Communion." However, Nazir-Ali said that the matter would also need to be approved by a majority of the church's diocesan synods.
From the moment a covenant is sent to provinces for adoption, "the Church of England would probably need at least 18 months to 2 years to come to a final decision," the report said.
In response to the third question, the report notes that "there is nothing in [the St. Andrew's Draft] contrary to Church of England faith and order."
Nevertheless, in its December 2007 response to the initial draft (Nassau Draft) of the covenant, the Church of England warned that it would be "unlawful for the General Synod to delegate its decision-making powers to the primates, and that this therefore means that it could not sign up to a covenant which purported to give the primates of the communion the ability to give 'direction' about the course of action that the Church of England should take."
In his address to synod, Nazir-Ali said that a covenant "would be freely entered into and would not supersede the authority of General Synod or of the Crown in Parliament. It would be comparable to agreements about communion with other churches.”
The report concluded: "We believe that the central role of the covenant is to help us to understand the gift of communion in terms of both the freedoms and the responsibilities that this gift brings to us … We are called into communion with one another and this means mutual accountability -- not only within the Anglican Communion, but also with our ecumenical partners. Part of the gift of communion is to recognize and be challenged by the way in which Christ is revealed to us through the stranger. We hope and pray that the covenant may make this possible."