Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely

This is from the ACC website. My comments are in this font.

From the Secretary General
Posted On : October 14, 2010 4:39 PM

The Secretary General writes: 'Many of you will have read the Archbishop of Canterbury's letter to the Anglican Communion issued at Pentecost last (28 May 2010). Part of that letter addresses the current and ongoing tensions in the Anglican Communion - these tensions cluster around the three moratoria referred to in the Windsor Report.

In that letter the Archbishop made the following proposals:When did "proposals" become law without debate or discussion when coming from the first among equals?

"I am therefore proposing that, while these tensions remain unresolved, members of such provinces – provinces that have formally, through their Synod or House of Bishops, adopted policies that breach any of the moratoria requested Here again, "requested?" by the Instruments of Communion and recently reaffirmed by the Standing Committee and the Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Unity, Faith and Order (IASCUFO) – should not be participants in the ecumenical dialogues in which the Communion is formally engaged. I am further proposing "Proposing" Arch-dictator? that members of such provinces serving on IASCUFO should for the time being have the status only of consultants rather than full members".

At that time I wrote to the Primate of the Southern Cone, whose interventions in other provinces are referred to in the Windsor Continuation Group Report asking him for clarification as to the current state of his interventions into other provinces. I have not received a response.May we say "Schism" now?

Consequently, I have written to the person from the Province of the Southern Cone who is a member of the Inter Anglican Standing Commission on Unity Faith and Order (IASCUFO), Bishop Tito Zavala, withdrawing his membership and inviting him to serve as a Consultant to that body.

These decisions are not taken easily or lightly, but relate to the gracious restraint requested by successive meetings of the Instruments of Communion and the implications for Communion bodies when these requests are not honoured.Amazing that apparently this was written and signed without laughter. "Gracious Restraint" sounds like a response to a request, but its absence is a basis for expulsion. The dictator of Canterbury and his executioner, one Welsh one Irish seem to need English as a second language classes.

What is really going on here is two things. First Dr. Williams has little time for mere provinces, archbishops or bishops who fail to do his, "requests." So Southern Cone has to go. To be fair, I actually agree that Southern Cone has acted badly. One of their bishops has more 'parishoners' poached from American bishops in the US than he does in his country. Their treating of the deposed J. D. Schofield and other deposed clergy as full members of the communion is a clear breach of tradition and canon. They have earned some response - but not this.

This is a simple act of usurped power. It was wrong when done to Americans and it's wrong done to others.

The second thing going on is brutish fund raising. This reeks of the the "See Americans we are not just picking on you" school of asking for more money. If TEC and AC Canada finally get tired of paying for the archbishop's fantasy dicatorship, he won't be flying first class. So being "even handed" appears to be a tactic to demonstrate why the question "Why only us?" has been answered.

It won't wash. It is unfair to a bishop who has done no wrong. It is also stupid. No one who actually wants the communion to live should be limiting the conversation. In a fellowship, a community, one needs to expand the conversation. Of course a curia led by a pontif does not need that. Hmmmm....

FWIW
jimB