As the day has gone on various people have begun to weigh in with their reactions to the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Advent letter, in which he lays out his thinking about the next steps for the Communion.
The Episcopal News Service coverage of the letter includes a reaction from the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church:
“Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori welcomed Williams’ Advent Letter. ‘In this season, as we focus on hope and preparation, I am glad to hear of the Archbishop’s interest in facilitating further conversations,’ she said. ‘While I have repeatedly offered to engage in dialogue with those who are most unhappy, the offer has not yet been seriously engaged. Perhaps a personal call from the Archbishop will bring to the table those who have thus far been unwilling to talk. Advent is both a time to ready our eyes to see God in unlikely guises, and to put our hope in God’s ultimate graciousness.'”
Mark Harris, who blogs at Preludium, and who served on the Special Commission which dealt with the Episcopal Church’s response to the Windsor Report writes in part:
“The message to the Primates continues the Archbishop’s slow dance around the issues troubling the Anglican Communion. It is a difficult document in that it leaves us with little to go on except that: (i) he thinks the Episcopal Church (TEC) has gone about as far as it can go at the moment, (ii) he is puzzled why bishops in TEC can’t just make decisions concerning ordinations and blessings on their own, (iii) that Bishop Robinson (who the ABC calls Gene Robinson, finding it difficult to acknowledge that Gene is indeed a bishop) is still not invited as a diocesan to Lambeth, and (iv) there may be bishops uninvited to Lambeth still, as well as bishops uninvited to engage in the life of the Communion, on the basis of their enthusiasm for the Windsor and Covenant process. The letter is something of a mess and a disappointment.
The message to the Communion is much the better letter. It soars. At its close he asks, “Let us ask ourselves honestly whose company we are ashamed to be seen in – and then ask where God would be. If he has embraced the failing and fragile world of human beings who know their needs, then we must be there with him.” Meditations like this is why so many of us have had such hopes in the ABC.”
The steering committee of the Chicago Consultation, which met recently to begin to coordinate Communion-wide efforts for the full inclusion of Gay and Lesbian Christians, has released a statement (via email):
“The archbishop’s lengthy letter contains not a word of comfort to gay and lesbian Christians. In asserting the Communion’s opposition to homophobia, he gives political cover to Archbishop Peter Akinola and other Primates whose anti-gay activities are a matter of public record. We are especially troubled by the absence of openly gay members on the bodies that may ultimately resolve the issues at hand. The archbishop’s unwillingness to include gay and lesbian Christians in this process perpetuates the bigotry he purports to deplore.”
BabyBlueOnline has her reaction here.
Terry Martin, who blogs at Father Jake’s has this analysis.
Julian Long, one of our commenters here on the Episcopal Cafe posted his reactions and analysis here.
Tobias Haller’s analysis is here.
Kendall Harmon has posted his initial response.
Integrity has released a statement.
Bishop Epting, Ecumenical Officer of the Episcopal Church has his reactions and thoughts here.
Craig Uffman, Dale Rye and others have posted their thoughts here.
“The Pluralist” comments on what he calls a “Bad Anglican Day”
Bill Coats sees something hopeful for the Episcopal Church in the Archbishop’s message.
The “Byzigenous Buddhapalian” is rather pessimistic after reading the letter and some of the online commentary.
Recently consecrated CANA bishop David Anderson says the Advent Letter is proof that Archbishop and a Lambeth-centered Communion has failed and should be replaced.
Michael Hopkins has also added his analysis. He is all for “being at the table,” but:
What if the table is in itself so distorted that nothing good can come of it? What if the table is, by design, not credible. And it is clearly not given that despite three previous Conference’s promise to listen to the experience of lesbian and gay persons, there is no evidence whatsoever that the next Conference intends to do so.
The Ugley Vicar, John Richardson, does a careful dissection of the letter from a conservatives’ perspective. Peter Kirk has similar thoughts.
Marshall Scott, a regular contributor to the Daily Episcopalian, asks ‘does the Archbishop of Canterbury believe that the Episcopal Church is not sufficiently “Episcopal?”’ as in bishop led.
Anglican Centrist says “thanks to Williams’ moderate approach, slow-going, and obvious love of the core Christian faith and life, and his broadly Anglican chops, the radical Right will leave the Communion long before that Windsor process is finished — and those who remain will be increasingly less polarized.”
Changing Attitude England has issued a response.
Marshall Hopkins wonders if Lambeth isn’t being setup to be juridical.
Commenters at Thinking Anglicans have much to say.
Fulcrum is happy.
Bishop Iker has a writes, “The best assistance that the Archbishop can offer to address the situation in TEC is to host a mediation that seeks a negotiated settlement for separation, without rancor or litigation”.
Do also check out the comments made on the original story.
(We’ll be updating this post with additional reactions as they are posted around the web.)