--- Michael Ward <mward@...> wrote:
> Charles+
> 
> I'm not sure what this means for the Continuum, but
> it may address the one  objection that I continually
hear from people in the  Episcopal church: "You 
aren't really Anglican because you aren't in 
communion with Canterbury."  We
> all know why we aren't, and I'm sure we've all
> talked 'til we're blue in the  face explaining it,
but it is nevertheless the one  thing that is always
held  over our heads.
> 
> Any idea whether or not this idea of "covenant"
> speaks to those outside the  official Communion?
> 
> MLW+
> ==========================================
> 
> New Anglican covenant begins to take shape 
> 
> By Bill Bowder 
> 
> THE OUTLINES of a sacrificial covenant that could
> bind > the Anglican Communion together as a
"genuinely global  communion of interdependent
autonomous Churches",

"------------------------------------

Good Morning Michael+

I would like to say yes to your question, but can't.

I like much of what the Archbishop of Canterbury
writes in spite of my opinion of the role he has
played.  But, there are just too many contradictions
in the proposal his committee puts forth for it to
gather a loyal following.

After all, how can there be a "genuinely global 
communion of interdependent autonomous Churches"?

To bring a historic example of the problem think of
the Mighty British Empire as it started to come apart
at the time of the American Revolution.  Once the
flags went up "Don't tread on Me", all the Kings
Horses and all the Kings Men couldn't put Humpty
together again.

The British Commonwealth of Nations came about as a
result of war and really didn't last long.  Winston
Churchill said he would not preside over the end of
the empire, but his successors did precisely that.

I see ++Williams as a tragic figure reliving the
torment of Churchill.  The World Wide Anglican
Communion remains an illusive dream.

Sure, President Bush and the Prime Minister can join
briefly to beat up on the Arabs but Americans will
never sing, "Rule Britannia."

It appears to me that those of us in the Continuum's
"Life Boats", if recognized at all, would be second
tier or third tier at best.  While Canterbury desires
one church and does not want a two tiered "communion"
because practically that would mean two churches, the
alternatives to schism given the make up of the
parties involved always comes down to something less
than unity.

Since the Lambeth Conference of Anglican Primates are
struggling to keep the Titanic from breaking up, I
suspect they will give scant attention to those of us
in the 35 year old life boats.  In my opinion, the
faithful bishops in this world whether in the Lambeth
Conference or not, had best lash all the life boats
together instead of looking over their shoulder at the
smoking remains of Sodom.

Is that enough mixed imagery for one morning?

Charles+
"------------------------------------------------