[faithandlife] ++WILLIAMS CONSIDERS A THIRD PROVINCE

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : December 2002 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: "Charles Scott" <crscott@...>
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 03:07:17 +0000

Brothers+

++Williams was recently interviewed by a reporter from the Church Times.

Below is a snippet from the rather lengthy interview.  Does the possibility 
of a Third Province by Canterbury offer any hope of unity for the 
fragmenting WWAC and the fragmented Continuum?

The entire interview, which covers a number of issues which ++Williams has 
had to face is posted at this website:  http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/

Charles+
--------------------------------------------------------------
snipped from the CHURCH TIMES
Take third province seriously — Williams
by Paul Handley

<snip>
Do we need a Third Province solution? That has got to be thought through 
from early on in the discussion, and not just in haste afterwards.

We have to face the reality that a lot of people who still identify 
themselves as Anglicans will not want to be in the kind of structural 
relationship they are now in with the rest of the Communion. Do we 
facilitate that?

In what sense would that be a different Church? Lots of Churches that call 
themselves Anglicans have no structural connection.

It would be for potential dissidents to answer the question: How strong a 
relation do you want? Do you want to be involved with the structures? If you 
don’t want simply to go off to be another continuing jurisdiction, but you 
want some status within the Communion as it exists, what is that going to 
mean? We would have to say to
potential dissidents: What degree of involvement is hopeless compromise, for 
you?

It sounds as if you are thinking about the Third Province idea quite 
seriously.

With some sympathy, partly because I don’t see that the Act of Synod style 
of provision will do anything here, and because I take seriously what people 
on both sides of the debate have said: you can’t indefinitely perpetuate a 
situation in which,in one body, the ministry of some is regarded wholly 
negatively. Therefore, what’s the
least evangelistically and spiritually damaging form of separation?

I know we’re travelling along a path of conjecture, but would you still want 
to be its archbishop?

I would want to go back to the question of what kind of communion, what kind 
of involvement, would such people be looking for. I would tackle it from 
there. I would be sorry to see a situation in which there was no kind of 
recognition, ownership, or relationship to some central, visible point like 
the see of Canterbury.

<snip>




_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 3 months FREE*. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU= 
http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_virusprotection_3mf