Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T06:19:29.729Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An American Reflects on the Windsor Report

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

Ian T. Douglas
Ian T. Douglas
Affiliation:
idouglas@eds.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Windsor Report of the Lambeth Commission on Communion was published in late 2004 and has been released with encouragement from the Archbishop of Canterbury that it be studied around the Anglican Communion. A ‘reception’ process has been established to solicit input and monitor discussion on the Windsor Report from across the Anglican Communion. This article is a reflection on the report from the perspective of an American Episcopalian missiologist and was offered as part of the ‘reception’ process. In a step-by-step examination of the contents of the Windsor Report, the reflection presents underlying currents, concerns and possibilities for the Anglican Communion arising from the Report. There is much of benefit in the Report while at the same time dissent is registered with some of its presuppositions and findings.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Anglican Studies , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , December 2005 , pp. 155 - 179
Copyright
Copyright © SAGE Publications (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore) and The Journal of Anglican Studies Trust 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Douglas, Ian T. and Zahl, Paul F. M., Understanding the Windsor Report: Two Leaders in the American Episcopal Church Speak across the Divide (New York: Church Publishing Inc., 2005).Google Scholar

2. For a fuller discussion of a missiological approach to Anglican ecclesiology see Douglas, Ian T., ‘Anglicans Gathering for God's Mission: A Missiological Ecclesiology for the Anglican Communion’, Journal of Anglican Studies 2.2 (2004), pp. 9–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Bayne, Stephen Fielding, Mutual Responsibility and Interdependence in the Body of Christ (New York: The Seabury Press, 1963).Google Scholar

4. The Inter Anglican Standing Commission on Mission and Evangelism under-scores the relational and missiological nature of communion. See ‘Communion in Mission’, Report of the Inter Anglican Standing Commission on Mission to the 13th Meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council.

5. It is thus very disturbing that there were reports that the primates were unable to come together in a common Eucharistic celebration when they met in the Primates Meeting in Newry, Ireland in February 2005.

6. Hughes, Robert D. III, ‘Thoughts on the Windsor Report’Google Scholar, unpublished address presented at St Bartholomew's Church, Nashville, Tennessee on 13 November 2004.

7. The Virginia Report in The Official Report of the Lambeth Conference of 1998 (Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse Publishing for the Anglican Communion, 1999), pp. 15–68.Google Scholar

8. Jenkins, Willis, ‘Episcopalians, Homosexuality, and World Mission’, Anglican Theological Review 86.2 (Spring 2004), pp. 293–316.Google Scholar

9. ‘Unity and Diversity within the Anglican Communion: A Way Forward’, in Anglican Consultative Council, Many Gifts, One Spirit, Report of ACC-7, Singapore, 1987 (London: ACC, 1987), pp. 129–34.Google Scholar

10. The Virginia Report, pp. 56–63.

11. The Virginia Report, pp. 398–99 (italics in original).

12. Journal of the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, 2000 (2 vols.; New York: The General Convention, 2000), pp. 256–57.Google Scholar

13. ‘Communiqué from the Primates Meeting, February 2005, para. 10, Anglican Communion News Service(hereafter ACNS) No. 3948, 24 02 2005, available at: http://www.anglicancommunion.org/acns/articles/39/00/acns3948.cfmGoogle Scholar

14. Doe, Norman, ‘Canon Law and Communion’, ACNS No. 2406, 8 03 2001, http://www.anglicancommunion.org/acns/acnsarchive/acns2400/acns2406.htmlGoogle Scholar

15. Doe, Norman, ‘Communion and Autonomy in Anglicanism: Nature and Maintenance’, available at: http://www.anglicancommunion.org/commission/documents/doc1index.cfmGoogle Scholar

16. Doe, , ‘Communion and Autonomy’, p. 1 nn. 5 and 6.Google Scholar

17. See, for example, ‘A Covenant for Communion in Mission’, developed by the Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Mission and Evangelism, that emphasizes the relational principles of a covenant. ‘Communion in Mission’, pp. 7–9.

18. Williams, Rowan, ‘Advent Pastoral Letter from the Archbishop of Canterbury to the Primates’, ACNS No. 3917, 29 11 2004, http://www.anglicancommunion.org/acns/articles/39/00/acns3917.cfmGoogle Scholar

19. Williams, , ‘Advent Pastoral Letter’.Google Scholar

20. At their spring meeting of the House of Bishops in March 2005, the vast majority of the bishops in the Episcopal Church agreed to do exactly this. Not only did the bishops agree to withhold consent to the election of homosexual bishops, but they also agreed to withhold consent to the election of heterosexual bishops as well, until the 2006 General Convention. See ‘House of Bishops Adopts “Covenant Statement”’, Episcopal News Service (ENS) No. 031505, 15 03 2005Google Scholar, available at: http://www.episcopalchurch.org/3577_60016_ENG_HTM.htm

21. House of Bishops, ' Group on Issues in Human Sexuality, Some Issues in Human Sexuality: A Guide to the Debate (London: Church House Publishing, 2003).Google Scholar

22. A paper is currently being drafted, under the authority of the Office of the Presiding Bishop, that documents the legislative and canonical history of the Episcopal Church with respect to homosexuality. This paper is part of the response to the Primates' invitation that the Episcopal Church sends representatives to the next Anglican Consultative Council meeting ‘to set out the thinking behind recent actions’. Communiqué from the Primates Meeting, February 2005, para. 10. See The Church, Episcopal, To Set Our Hope on Christ: A Response to the Invitation of Windsor Report Paragraph 135 (New York: Office of Communications, The Episcopal Church Center, 2005)Google Scholar, esp. the ‘Appendix’, pp. 63–123.

23. Journal of the 74th General Convention of the Episcopal Church(New York: The General Convention, 2004), pp. 239–42.Google Scholar

24. Journal of the 74th General Convention, pp. 239–42.Google Scholar

25. Marshall, Paul, ‘Institution over Inspiration’, 19 10 2004, available at: http://thewitness.org/agw/marshall101904.htmlGoogle Scholar

26. For an overview of the work of the Windsor Report Reception process, see http://www.anglicancommunion.org/commission/reception/index.cfm