Canada GS2007: Windsor Report Response Group, Report to General Synod
June 2007

The Windsor Report Response Group was established in 2005 to coordinate the response of the Anglican Church of Canada to the Windsor Report of the Lambeth Commission on Communion (published October, 2004; available online at http://www.anglicancommunion.org/windsor2004/). It is composed of members of the Partners in Mission and Faith Worship and Ministry Committees and the House of Bishops.

Initially the group prepared a report outlining the response of the Canadian church for the Primate to take to the February 2005 Primates Meeting. The group met again in October 2006 and drafted a response for the Council of General Synod to consider as the response of the Canadian church to the Windsor Report. That draft was considered by the Council of General Synod at its meeting in November 2006. Focus groups and individuals provided helpful comments. The Council asked the Response Group to revise the draft and bring it back to the March 2007 meeting of the Council. A summary of the first draft response was placed on the website, and the full draft was sent to the House of Bishops, with a request for further comments. Four comments were received. A number of groups met in dioceses and parishses to talk about the Windsor Report, and this too has provided helpful information.

The Windsor Report Response Group met in February 2007 and revised the draft in the light of comments received and of further discussion within the life of our church. That draft was considered by the Council of General Synod in March 2007, which made a few amendments and then adopted it.

The Group met again by conference call in the light of the Primates’ Meeting in Tanzania and proposed a resolution regarding the Covenant, which was also amended by the Council of General Synod and adopted. The Group has agreed to stand by to take any actions necessary until a successor body, similar in composition, can be named.

Patricia Bays
Chair, Windsor Report Response Group

---

A Response to the Windsor Report

prepared by the Windsor Report Response Group
and adopted by the Council of General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada
March 2007

Introduction

1. We present a response from the Anglican Church of Canada to the Windsor Report, in the spirit of Archbishop Eames’ foreword to the report, “in the prayerful hope that it will encourage the advanced levels of understanding which are essential for the future of the Anglican Communion.”

2. In October 2004, the bishops of the Anglican Church of Canada “received with thanks the Windsor Report” and “recognizing its importance . . .commended it for study throughout the church.” The report was widely read and studied. Responses were invited from Anglicans across Canada, and many, both lay and clergy, took the opportunity to comment on the report. A summary of their response is found in Appendix 2.

3. As Canadian Anglicans, we are committed to our membership in the Anglican Communion. We are committed to engaging in a process of dialogue, listening to the voices of other Provinces and sharing our experience as we try to live out those tasks to which the gospel calls us, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

4. We understand that, in responding to the Windsor Report, we are engaging in a process of discernment. From 1997 to 2001, the Virginia Report of the International Anglican Theological and Doctrinal Commission was studied widely and a Canadian response prepared. The Virginia Report raises many of the questions with which the Windsor Report is concerned – what binds Anglicans together, what is the theological basis for unity and communion, what structures can best express the kind of communion we seek. The Windsor Report builds upon the Virginia Report and on the reports of Lambeth Conferences, Anglican Consultative Council and Primates’ Meetings, and other Anglican gatherings. We recognize the Windsor Report as an important contribution to this process within the Anglican Communion, and we commend it to our church and to the Communion for wider study. We see the present dialogue as one stage in an ongoing process of discernment of the nature of communion. We agree with Archbishop Eames that the Report ‘is not a judgement…but is part of a pilgrimage towards healing and reconciliation’. We view the Report, and the responses it has engendered, as ‘a genuine contribution to what communion really means for Anglicans’. (Preface)

5. In the Windsor Report, we find much to affirm and to celebrate, and we find there areas where we believe further work needs to be done. These two aspects shape the next sections of our response.

What we affirm

Among the many things we can affirm in the Windsor Report, we wish to highlight these:

6. We believe that the opening reflection of the Report (paragraphs 1-5) makes a significant contribution to our understanding of the nature of the Church (ecclesiology). We celebrate the statement that “communion with God and one another in Christ is thus both a gift and a divine expectation.” Our unity is based on “our common identity in Christ.” The purpose of our unity is “the furtherance of God’s mission within the world.” (¶5)

7. We affirm that “the communion we enjoy as Anglicans involves a sharing in double ‘bonds of affection’: those that flow from our shared status as children of God in Christ, and those that arise from our shared and inherited identity, which is the particular history of the churches to which we belong.” (¶45) Communion is not an abstraction but a lived reality that finds its concrete expression in particular communities of faith. We live in Canada, in a particular time and place, and are called to minister within that context. Within the Anglican Church of Canada, as within many of the Provinces of the Communion, there is great diversity – of language, of culture, of ways of understanding and expressing theology. We celebrate that diversity and share with the Communion some of the ways we have come to understand that call to unity in diversity.

8. We remind ourselves that our primary task is “to take forward God’s mission to his needy and much-loved world.” (¶46)

Scripture

9. We affirm the importance of Scripture as a “focus and means of unity” (¶53) and the Report’s emphasis upon the central role of Scripture in Anglican belief and life. The Windsor Report recognizes that reference to the authority of Scripture in historic Christianity means “the authority of the triune God, exercised through scripture”. (¶54) It affirms this authority as an aspect of “the dynamic inbreaking of God’s kingdom”, rather than “a static source of information or the giving of orders” (¶55). With the Windsor Report, we affirm that “Scripture is thus part of the means by which God directs the Church in its mission, energizes it for that task, and shapes and unites it so that it may be both equipped for this work and itself part of the message.” (¶55)

10. We celebrate the way in which Scripture is central to Anglican worship. “For scripture to ‘work’ as the vehicle of God’s authority it is vital that it be read at the heart of worship in a way which (through appropriate lectionaries and the use of scripture in canticles etc.) allows it to be heard, understood and reflected upon, not as a pleasing and religious background noise, but as God’s living and active word.” (¶57) We note the statement in the Windsor Report that “questions of interpretation are rightly raised, not as an attempt to avoid or relativise scripture and its authority, but as a way of ensuring that it really is scripture that is being heard.” (¶59) We affirm that it is “the responsibility of the whole Church to engage with the Bible together . . . so that when difficult judgements are required they may be made in full knowledge of the texts.” (¶57)

11. We want to respond to the call of the Windsor Report “to re-evaluate the ways in which we have read, heard, studied and digested scripture. We can no longer be content to drop random texts into arguments, imagining that the point is thereby proved, or indeed to sweep away sections of the New Testament as irrelevant to today’s world, imagining that problems are thereby solved.” (¶61) We pray that the Bible can be for Anglicans “a means of unity, not division.” (¶62) “Our shared reading of scripture across boundaries of culture, region and tradition ought to be the central feature of our common life guiding us together into an appropriately rich and diverse unity by leading us forward from entrenched positions into fresh appreciation of the riches of the gospel as articulated in the scriptures.” (¶62)

The Lambeth Quadrilateral

12. With ¶51, we affirm the Lambeth Quadrilateral which “commits Anglicans to ‘a series of normative practices: scripture is read, tradition is received, sacramental worship is practised, and the historic character of apostolic leadership is retained.’ ” In saying this, we affirm the statement of the Primates’ Meeting in 2000, “We believe that the unity of the Communion as a whole still rests on the Lambeth Quadrilateral: the holy Scriptures as the rule and standard of faith; the creeds of the undivided Church; the two sacraments ordained by Christ himself and the historic episcopate. Only a formal and public repudiation of this would place a diocese or Province outside the Anglican Communion.” We note that Appendix 3.1 of the Windsor Report does not quote the Lambeth Quadrilateral, but an earlier version (see Appendix 1 of this report for the text of the Lambeth Quadrilateral as adopted by the Lambeth Conference of 1888 and received by the Anglican Church of Canada in 1893.)

Episcopacy

13. We affirm that “the unity of the Communion is both expressed and put into effect among other things through the episcopate.” (¶63) We affirm the role of bishops as representing the universal church to the local and vice versa (¶64), as teachers of scripture (¶58), as chief pastors to their diocese and as bonds of unity in the Communion. (¶64)

14. We affirm Windsor’s call to “those bishops who believe it is their conscientious duty to intervene in provinces, dioceses and parishes other than their own:
    • To express regret for the consequences of their action
    • To affirm their desire to remain in the Communion, and
    • To effect a moratorium on further interventions.

    We also call upon these archbishops and bishops to seek an accommodation with the bishops of the dioceses whose parishes they have taken into their own care.” (¶155) We as a Province have been affected by bishops who have intervened. Such interventions are contrary to the Windsor Report, Lambeth Conference resolutions and the Primates’ Communiqué of 2005.

15. We believe, with the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Panel of Reference, that the Shared Episcopal Ministry scheme of the Canadian House of Bishops provides sufficient supplementary episcopal oversight for dissenting congregations. (See Appendix 4 and Windsor ¶151; the report of the Panel of Reference is available at http://www.aco.org/commission/reference/docs/report_october.pdf)

The Listening Process

16. We affirm the statement of the Windsor Report – “We remind all in the Communion that Lambeth Resolution 1.10 calls for an ongoing process of listening and discernment, and that Christians of good will need to be prepared to engage honestly and frankly with each other on issues related to human sexuality.” (¶146) In the Anglican Church of Canada, we have tried to take seriously this call to listening and dialogue. Appendix 2 describes some of the ways in which our church has engaged in this discussion. We look forward to hearing how the “listening process” is proceeding in other Provinces, and to learning new insights from their experience.

17. We are concerned for the human rights of homosexual persons and affirm the call of the Windsor Report for Provinces to be pro-active in support of Lambeth resolution 64 (1988), which called upon each Province to reassess “its care for and attitude toward persons of homosexual orientation.” (¶146) We would like to encourage dialogue on what is appropriate pastoral care for homosexual persons and their families.

Diversity

18. “The nature of unity within the Anglican Communion necessarily includes the rich diversity which comes from factors such as local culture and different traditions of reading scripture.” (¶71) We believe that, among Christians of good faith, there can be legitimate differences on many issues, and we wish to protect the freedom of conscience of those with differing views. We believe that further work needs to be done on expressing a theology of diversity, including its limits, especially as rooted in the theology of God the Trinity. We rejoice in the publication of the Cyprus Statement of the International Commission for Anglican Orthodox Theological Dialogue as an important contribution to this subject.

What we have done so far

19. Appendix 2 outlines events and actions in the Anglican Church of Canada. Shortly after the release of the Windsor Report, in response to ¶144, the Bishop of New Westminster stated, “We do regret the consequences of our actions with sadness. We realize that many have not understood what we have been attempting to do in this diocese, or have even received news of our actions with dismay. What we have been trying to do is make the church more welcoming and open to all Christians, whatever their sexual orientation.” In April 2005 the Canadian House of Bishops adopted a statement committing themselves to a moratorium on the blessing of same-sex unions. The synod of the Diocese of New Westminster in May 2005 confirmed the decision to effect a moratorium by restricting the Blessing of Same Sex Unions to the eight parishes which as of the end of synod had, by majority vote of the parish membership, decided to ask to be places of blessing. None of the remaining congregations would be authorized to hold such blessings, until the decisions of General Synod in 2007. The synod expressed its desire to remain full members of the Anglican Communion.

20. Decisions made in the diocese of New Westminster have been the result of resolutions of synod over a period of years. In the Anglican Church of Canada, we are taking the time required by our synodical procedures for decision-making. We acknowledge the need to keep other Provinces informed of our decisions, and we continue to work at methods of sharing information. At its meeting in May, 2005, the Council of General Synod passed the following resolution: “that the Council of General Synod affirm the membership of the Anglican Church of Canada in the Anglican Consultative Council in the expectation that the duly elected members attend but not participate in the June 2005 meeting of the Council.” We made a presentation at the meeting describing our experience in the Canadian Church. We continue to take our place in the networks and on the commissions of the Anglican Communion, and remain committed to our partnership relationships.

21. Though in an episcopally led church bishops have a good deal of power and authority, in Canada there are many areas of church life in which bishops have agreed to yield that power to synods. The Primate and the bishops are not free to make decisions themselves on these matters. In the Anglican Church of Canada, we have developed a system of synodical government in which clergy and laity share with bishops in decision-making. As a church, we are moving slowly through the process that our constitution and canons require. The decision-making process takes time, and we need to allow time for the discernment process to unfold.

22. A resolution to allow for the blessing of same-sex unions was deferred by the General Synod of 2004, pending an evaluation by the Primate’s Theological Commission. The Commission was asked to consider and report to the Council of General Synod whether the blessing of committed same sex unions is a matter of doctrine. The St. Michael Report in 2005 concluded that the blessing of same sex unions is a matter of doctrine, but not of “core” or credal doctrine. They also stated that they do not believe that this should be a communion-breaking issue’. The Council of General Synod received the St. Michael Report and recommended that General Synod debate the following resolution: ‘that General Synod accept the conclusion of the Primate’s Theological Commission that the blessing of same-sex unions is a matter of doctrine but is not core doctrine in the sense of being credal.’ We are obligated by our canons and constitution to consider this report at General Synod 2007, to evaluate its conclusion, and to consider the motion on the blessing of same sex unions deferred from General Synod 2004. Since their publication, both the Windsor Report and the St. Michael Report are being studied extensively in parishes and dioceses. We enter these discussions mindful of the common life of the Communion and in response to the leading of the Spirit, as we see it in our own context.

23. In Canada, we live in a society in which civil governments have made legal the marriage of same-sex couples. We are compelled to explore the distinction between the blessing of same sex unions and marriage. We note the distinction the report makes between authorized Public Rites and ‘a breadth of private response to situations of individual pastoral care’ (¶143). . One diocese has made provision to authorize public rites; others allow a range of private pastoral responses. All are motivated by pastoral concern, and we continue to be in conversation together about this issue.

What requires further work

24. We believe that much more work needs to be done in the Communion on understanding what “reception” means. How do we receive and make effective in the life of each Province the reports and documents of international bodies? How has the Virginia Report been received by Provinces since it was presented to the Lambeth Conference 1998? How do individual Provinces receive, for example, the reports of the Anglican Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC)? How are comments and suggestions received and acted upon? In the Anglican Church of Canada, we try to commend all such reports to dioceses and parishes for study and comment. This process of reception takes time, but we believe that there is a value in consulting widely among the members of our church. This process would be enhanced by the translation of critical documents into the languages of the Communion and a more intentional process of listening to linguistic minorities within the Communion who might otherwise be cut out of the discussion.

25. We believe that more work needs to be done to clarify our understanding of what is meant by the phrase ‘the authority of Scripture’, recognizing that Anglicanism has historically accommodated a variety of approaches to the reading and understanding of Scripture and has in each period used the best contemporary techniques of scholarship and interpretation. We heartily concur that ‘it is the responsibility of the whole Church to engage with the Bible together.’ (¶57) We acknowledge the important role of bishops as teachers of scripture (¶58), but want to affirm also the role of lay and clergy scholars in their ongoing work as teachers of Scripture. We affirm, as a vital aspect of our Reformation heritage, that it is the common vocation of all the baptized to engage in the learning and teaching of Scripture. Given the Windsor Report’s very high expectation of Christian leaders as teachers of Scripture, the Anglican Church of Canada (and possibly other parts of the Communion) must place renewed emphasis on the biblical and theological formation of bishops, clergy and lay leaders. To this end we applaud the Archbishop of Canterbury’s initiative and call for Theological Education in the Anglican Communion.

26. We believe that a wider range of Scripture should be used in exploring the nature of communion and the Church. The Windsor Report makes use of a relatively small range, drawing on examples from the epistles but not from the gospels or the Old Testament.

27. We believe that more work should be done in examining the way authority is exercised in the Anglican Communion. We are concerned about the attempt to increase the influence of bishops by giving to the Lambeth Conference and the Primates’ Meeting an authority not previously held. In particular, the meeting of the Primates brings together bishops who have differing powers and jurisdiction in their own Provinces. What began as a meeting of collegial consultation is increasingly acting as an authoritative body. With regard to the Lambeth Conference, we refer to the preface to the Lambeth Conference report of 1978 which describes the authority of Lambeth resolutions: ‘The resolutions have no legislative authority unless or until they have been accepted by the Synods or other governing bodies of the member Churches of the Anglican Communion, and then only in those member Churches’. (p. 5)

28. Provinces of the Communion have made different decisions about the ordination of women, the admission to Holy Communion before Confirmation, polygamy, the remarriage of divorced persons, liturgical revision, entering into relationships of full communion with other churches, the jurisdiction of primates, and synodical government. Wherever possible, it is preferable that Provinces consult with one another on important matters, but it has never been the case that all Provinces must agree before a decision is taken. We note the proposal of the Windsor Report that on serious matters, ‘in order for bonds of affection to be properly acknowledged and addressed’, churches proposing to take action undertake ‘to demonstrate to the rest of the Communion why their proposal meets the criteria of scripture, tradition and reason’ (¶141). We want to work with all other Provinces to explore ways in which such consultation can happen.

29. We believe that it is important to ensure that laity share in taking counsel on matters affecting the life of the Communion. We do not wish to see this role diminished in the membership of the Anglican Consultative Council. This council provides the one opportunity in the Anglican Communion for lay people and clergy to share with the bishops in discussions and recommendations. We have taken an active role in the Council since its inception. In the Anglican Church of Canada, laity and clergy share with the bishops in decision making at all levels of the church’s life.

30. We affirm the idea of developing an Anglican Covenant, noting the call of Windsor that it be developed through a “long-term process, in an educative context, be considered for real debate and agreement on its adoption as a solemn witness to communion.” (¶118) We are committed to such a longterm process and would hope that such a covenant would promote mutual responsibility and interdependence within the Communion. We have reservations about the constitutional tone of the example provided in the Windsor Report. We find that example too detailed in its proposals and we are concerned that such a model might foster the development of a complex bureaucratic structure which might stifle change and growth in mission and ministry. We would prefer a shortened and simplified covenant, perhaps based on the model of the baptismal covenant, or ecumenical covenants such as the Waterloo Declaration between the Anglican Church of Canada and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada, or the covenant proposed by the Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Mission and Evangelism. We value the Ten Principles of Partnership cited in Appendix 3 of Windsor and would hope that they inform the drafting of a covenant. We affirm that any group given the responsibility of developing an Anglican Covenant needs to be broadly representative of the membership of the Church, including men and women, clergy and lay people, a variety of geographical regions and theological emphases.

31. The Covenant process could provide a place where the evolving structures of the Communion can be discussed and agreed upon. The current practice seems to be the development of ad hoc agreements or actions based on reports which have not yet been received by the whole Communion. We affirm that “we do not favour the accumulation of formal power by the Instruments of Unity, or the establishment of any kind of central ‘curia’ for the Communion.” (¶105) In responding to the Virginia Report in 2001, many Canadians felt that the present structures serve well when used fully and creatively. “The personal and relational life of the Church is always prior to the structural. … Right structuring and right ordering provide channels by which, through the power of the Holy Spirit, the mind of Christ is discerned, the right conduct of the Church encouraged and the gifts of the many are drawn upon in the service and mission of the Church.” (Virginia Report, 5.4) We would be wary of the over-development of structures which would make it difficult for the Church to respond quickly and easily to fulfill its mission in its local context. We are distrustful of the development of structural changes driven primarily by issues and in the midst of acute crisis.

32. We affirm that respect for dissenting minorities needs to be applied to all sides of all issues being discussed in the Church. The Anglican Church has a long tradition of holding together in one church a variety of theological positions and emphases. We hope that the Church will be resilient enough to maintain that degree of diversity while growing in its sense of communion.

Conclusion

33. We affirm ¶40 of the Windsor Report where it describes “a more general feature which ought to characterize life within the Communion: a relationship of trust.” Such trust is, in the first place, the fruit of our shared faith in Christ. Trust is built when we meet together, to listen and to talk in mutual acceptance and humility, to read Scripture, to engage in theological study, and to pray. Trust is built when we engage in partnership for mission and development, for social action and education. As Anglicans, we have spent time in ecumenical and inter-faith dialogue, developing ways of speaking and listening respectfully, of sharing insights and experiences, of expressing differences and yet trying to find those deeper levels of agreement that will enable us to remain in a relationship. We affirm our willingness to work with other Provinces to develop such a relationship of trust and mutuality with in the Anglican Communion We commit ourselves to try to walk with more humility with our sisters and brothers and with our God.

34. With Archbishop Eames, we again wish to affirm that the Windsor Report is “part of a process. It is part of a pilgrimage towards healing and reconciliation.” We look forward to continuing with others in that process and pilgrimage.

Resolution for General Synod to consider

BE IT RESOLVED:

That this General Synod endorse the report of the Windsor Report Response Group, as adopted by the Council of General Synod (March 2007), and that the following be forwarded, along with the report, to the Anglican Communion Office and the Provinces of the Anglican Communion.

The Anglican Church of Canada:

1. reaffirms its commitment to full membership and participation in the life, witness and structures of the Anglican Communion;
2. reaffirms its commitment to the Lambeth Quadrilateral, as received by our church in 1893;
3. expresses its desire and readiness to continue our participation in the ongoing life of the Communion through partnerships and visits, theological and biblical study, in order to foster Communion relationships, including the listening process and the development and possible adoption of an Anglican covenant;
4. reaffirms its mutual responsibility and interdependence with our Anglican sisters and brothers in furthering the mission of the church;
5. notes that, in response to the Windsor Report, the Diocese of New Westminster expressed regret, and the House of Bishops effected a moratorium on the blessing of same-sex unions, and
6. calls upon those archbishops and other bishops who believe that it is their conscientious duty to intervene in Provinces, dioceses and parishes other than their own to implement paragraph 155 of the Windsor Report and to seek an accommodation with the bishops of the dioceses whose parishes they have taken into their own care; and
7. commits itself to participation in the Listening Process and to share with member churches of the Communion the study of human sexuality which continues to take place, in the light of Scripture, tradition and reason.

[Appendices omitted - For the full text of this report, including appendices, go to http://www.anglican.ca/faith/identity/wrrg-response.htm]

This article comes from the Anglican Church of Canada
http://www.anglican.ca/

The URL for this story is:
http://www.anglican.ca/gs2007/rr/reports/report-17.pdf