jump to navigation

Philippine ‘no’ to the Anglican Covenant: The Church of England Newspaper, Aug 5, 2011 p 4. August 4, 2011

Posted by geoconger in Anglican Covenant, Church of England Newspaper, Episcopal Church of the Philippines.
Tags:
trackback

Prime Bishop Edward Malecdan of the Philippines (ACNS photo)

First published in The Church of England Newspaper.

The Bishops of the Episcopal Church in the Philippines have rejected the proposed Anglican Covenant, saying the proposal to centralise authority in London was an “un-Anglican” attempt to “lord it over” the Communion’s national provinces.

Speaking to the 8th Philippine General Synod on 2 May, the Church’s Prime Bishop, the Most Rev Edward Malecdan, argued the best way forward through the crisis of faith and order dividing Anglicans was to keep talking while taking no action that would cause irreparable harm to the fabric of the Communion.

“I think most of us know that there are problems besetting the Communion,” he observed, noting that “one of this is the practice of The Episcopal Church USA, or TEC, in consecrating practicing homosexuals and lesbians to the episcopate. The other is the acceptance of same-sex marriages in both TEC and in the Anglican Church of Canada or ACoC.”

The responses to these breaches of Communion by the US and Canada had led some provinces to call for the isolation of “these two North American Churches. They express in no uncertain terms that the Church in Canada and TEC should be out of the Communion.”

These Churches that have sought to punish TEC and Canada have looked to the “Instruments of Communion,” specifically the Primates’ Meeting “to make that decision, presumably for the whole Communion,” he said.

Bishop Malecdan added there was also a plan to “create a parallel Anglican Communion which would exclude in its membership TEC, ACoC and the Archbishop of Canterbury as an instrument of Communion, such that those who planned this boycotted the Lambeth Conference in 2009 and the Primates’ Meeting I attended in Dublin.

“Associated with this problem is the Anglican Covenant which is supposedly a proposed document to help defuse the tension in the Communion. The document is intended to be the final arbiter in the resolution of conflicts in the Communion and that all member Churches will have to adhere to its provisions.”

Bishop Malecdan stated the Philippine Council of Bishops “noted that the document provides for the creation of a Standing Committee that will be the ‘Supreme Court’ as it were, for the Anglican Communion to lord it over all Anglican Provinces. This, to the Council is very un-Anglican because of the autonomous nature of each Anglican Province. Hence, we are not in favour of the document.”

The Bishop said his impression of the Dublin Primates’ Meeting was one of a Church where “unity and diversity” was “clearly and strongly affirmed.”

“We recognised that Anglicans have many disagreements as a Communion but we still can be agreeable to one another. We can still move towards reconciliation as sisters and brothers as a gift of God to us by persistently talking about our differences. This is the beauty of Anglicanism.

“Unity in diversity which is a recognized uniqueness of the Communion is preserved,” the prime bishop said.

Advertisements

Comments

1. mcadey - August 5, 2011

He needs to read the bible,and what it says about false prophets,and those who will promote false doctrine.You dont need to be in fellowship with people like that.Those that GOD have left them alone with their lustful desire,there is nothing that any mortal soul can do to help them.Its a waste of time, to see, if, those, who are using the church, to promote, their faggot agenda,will see the light or change.”You have declared sodomy as your sin,you hide it not,woe to you for you only harm you own soul”Isaiah 3vs 9

Ann Thorington - August 5, 2011

The bishop in the Philippines does not want to upset the applecart – However – the apples are rotten. Until TEC reforms its ways – it seems that mcadey has it right.
It is heartbreaking that the church has been so infiltrated.

Bert Daly - August 12, 2011

I assume we are all “rotten” to some degree but we have a Savior, We should keep talking to discern God’s will, and yes the church is “infiltrated” with sinners, thank God.

2. Rod - August 5, 2011

I applaud the Bishops of the Episcopal Church in the Philippines for their good sence, right thinking, and faithfulness to Scripture and tradition. The bishops have reminded us that the Anglican Communion has always avoided the entanglements of oppressive, centralized authority. By their vote, theyhave called us all to continue in the ways the church has gone in the past.

Mr. McAdey quoted Isaiah’s comment on Sodomy. Let us remember that most respected scripture scholars define sodomy as a lack of generosity and kindness toward the poor, and toward people who are different. Perhaps Mr. McAdey’s lack of kindness is one part of his own sin in the area that seems to concern him so much.

mcadey - August 8, 2011

You are a liar sir.Sodomy came from sodom and Gommorah.The biblical prophets used it to describe the inpending doom to the Israelites.The scripture is so simple you dont need to be a biblical scholar to underdstand it.Let your yes be yes,and your no be no.Sodomy by any other name is still sodomy.You can call it gay.It did not change the fact.What do you think, will happen to a basket full of good apples with just a rotten one.?What the tec is doing is wrong,it is not compatible with the scripture.If Jesus could tell the female adulterer,not to do it anymore.He definately would have rebuked the tec too,with their lustful gay desire.He also said that,not everybody will be admitted into his kingdom,just because they claim to be his followers.Read your bible.

3. tj - August 6, 2011

This reply is directed to Rod (above) and generally to those who like to refer to what the Anglican Communion has “always” done. The Anglican Communion hasn’t “always” done anything, since it hasn’t “always” existed – in fact it has only existed (does it still?) for a comparatively very short period of time (to speak of the Church of England throughout the expanding and then contracting British empire is perhaps a different matter). To refer to what the Anglican Communion has “always” done (usually something the claimant wishes it has done for a while but usually not even that) is almost as historically unconscious as Gene Robinson’s one-man sideshow comments during the last Lambeth conference that the Franciscans have been in Canterbury “ever since” they arrived in the mid-13th century – ridiculously and ignorantly (or mendaciously, you decide) casting aside the fact that they were eliminated, dissolved by Henry VIII, in 1538, and did not return until c.1973-4 (RC) and 2003 (CofE). Hardly “ever since”, “always”, or any variation thereof. Likewise, the “Anglican Communion” or rather the Church of England at home and abroad, pre- and post-colonial (or in the case of the latter in the US, PECUSA), hasn’t “always” been all about local decision-making and autonomy. It has much more frequently been about imposition of conformity by monarch and/or parliament, frequently quite severely, since the sixteenth century until at least the early twentieth. Learn history, do not invent it. It would do a great deal toward disabusing many of countless false claims made.

4. Carl - August 6, 2011

mcadey, let me ask you a few questions:

1. do you lend to others at interest (in other words, do you deposit money at a bank, lending it to the bank at interest)?
2. do you wear clothing that is made of several different types of fiber, say a linen/silk blend or cotton/poly?
3. do you eat shellfish?
4. do you eat rare meat?

all of these are contrary to biblical law.

which biblical laws do you abide by?

which biblical laws do you break?

and why?

mcadey - August 8, 2011

Yes,to all of your questions.Jesus christ resolved everything,when he said, that, it is not what you eat(include what you wear)that defies you.What defies you is inward,ie,your food of thought,especially those evil thinking,that is inside of you,especially,when you act upon those thoughts,like having sex with a man,as if he is a woman!The outward situation is diffenrent.I mean, what you eat or drink that goes into your belly.Do you see the logic in this case?When you excrete or urinate what you drink,does it really matter?It have served its purpose.Do you remember the vision that Peter had,whereby,he saw himself,eating all those forbiding food?Paul resolved everything,when he talked about the real issue.Which is the circumssion,of the heart,not of the flesh.Anybody can be circumsied by on the flesh,it is like baptism,but that of the heart,you have to perform that yourself.Nobody can do that for you.Comprede?

mcadey - August 8, 2011

I just sent you a reply,but it is not there.I answered all your questions.Read what the bible says about the circumssion of the heart,not of the flesh,and also what Jesus said about what defies a man.It is the evil thoughts,not what we eat,that defies us.That “food of though”.

Bert Daly - August 12, 2011

Before you know it we’ll allow divorced persons to be remarried in the church!

5. Bishop Alexander Wandag - August 8, 2011

Alex: “Mcady keep talking, we’re Anglicans and we’re listening. Say anything and everything. brother”.

6. jimB - August 9, 2011

The assumption that a bishop is not reading the Bible defines “fundamentalist stupidity.” Why oh why can’t these people consider that they might be wrong, or that others might see things differently?

FWIW
jimB

mcadey - August 9, 2011

It is not a matter of seeing things differently,the point, is,what does the bible says about homosexuality?There are lots of passages in both the old and the new testaments that considered that sexual act as sinful.Mind you the new and the old testaments did not contradicts each other,they complemented each other.Those who claim to see things differently are either lieing,or they are falsefying the scripture.Almighty GOD cannot be mocked.

Joe - August 10, 2011

Thus, you are amongst those who believe that each word, turn of phrase, or comment in the Bible is to be taken at face value? Historically (yes, tj and others, historically) the Episcopal Church has sheltered many groups of thought. The 39 Articles (really, 38 in the US) says that the Bible contains everything sufficient for salvation. It does not say that everything in the Bible is necessary for salvation. Those are rather precise words, I think. It has always seemed odd to me, for instance, that Paul is about the only one in the New Testament who even mentions same-sex sex.

7. Samuel Oluwadare Oluwagbemiro Ojowuro - August 30, 2011

Reasoning is good but may not be spirituality.This is evidently the age of perversion,of the ”abomination of desecration” as spoken by Daniel.All rationalist’s attempt at subverting the truth of the bible can not change its message.it is good to call a spade its real name.Same-sex marriage like adultery and any other sin can never be acceptable to heaven focused children of God.The middle way out of sinful controversy is not only sentimental but a compromise.Beware!

8. Samuel Oluwadare Oluwagbemiro Ojowuro - August 30, 2011

what is bad is bad,don’t compromise or sit on the fence.Say no to same sex marriage or any other kind of sin.We shall all give account of our stewardship some day.

9. Samuel Oluwadare Oluwagbemiro Ojowuro - August 30, 2011

Lets call a spade its name and stop polishing the issue or sitting on the fence.Same-sex marriage like any other sinful act is detestable in God’s sight irrespective of our level of reasoning or rationalism.We shall all give account of our stewardship to God.If this act is condoned,very soon,adulterers,divorcees,polygamists etc will also find comfort and confidence in the church.Do you have the hope of eternal life? Then don’t compromise God’s standard.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: