“The subcommittee’s work is admirable and offers a thorough analysis of the grave ecumenical and inter-Anglican problems caused by ECUSA’s decisions at General Convention 2003 as well as the consecration of V. Gene Robinson,” said Bishop Duncan. “This document is particularly significant given the continuing unilateral actions of ECUSA leaders, such as the Bishop of North Carolina’s recent decision to allow same sex blessings in his diocese,” he added.

The sub-commission was appointed by Archbishop Williams and Cardinal Kasper of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. The group considered and addressed the concept of real “communion” in light of the consecration of V. Gene Robinson.

The document strongly asserts that “what one communion does has consequences for the other.” It goes on to note that it is not autonomy, but “unity and interdependence” that are the essential building blocks of real communion. Both have been deeply undermined by Robinson’s consecration. “How can a bishop whose ordination made him a cause of controversy (leading others to break communion with him and with those who consecrated him) represent the local community in the councils of the church? How can he mediate the unity of the universal Church to his diocese when he is at odds with large segments of the universal church?”

While ECUSA leadership claims the right of provincial autonomy, the sub-commission points to church history to refute such arguments. “Recalling the crises, councils and canons of the 4th century helps us to reflect on our current situation: in particular, on the role of the local bishop, and his relationship to the metropolitan and the universal Church, in safeguarding the unity of the Church. The practice of the 4th century, which shows that, in challenging situations, consultation and conciliarity alone are not always sufficient to sustain and protect ecclesial communion, may also suggest models for the Anglican Communion as it seeks to find a way forward.”

In addition, the paper highlights the fact that actions such as ECUSA’s and New Westminster’s are destructive to the Church and were therefore ill-advised. “When fundamental changes arise which may impair the communion of the Church, then concern for others, mutual forbearance, deferring to others, putting the interest of others above one’s own are marks of the way of communion. We ask whether these attitudes were shown towards all sections of the Anglican Communion and towards the holders of all shades of opinion in the Communion in the recent decisions of New Hampshire and New Westminster.”

In, their conclusion, the sub-commission illustrates the severe problems created by independent, unilateral actions in the name of autonomy that undermine the theological and moral teaching of Christianity. “If Anglican Dioceses or provinces were to embrace the notion of ‘local option’ for important decisions about the teaching of the Church in matters of faith and morals, and if bonds of communion were weakened in the direction of a federation of autonomous provinces rather than a relationship of mutual responsibility and interdependence, then our consensus on the ecclesiology of communion would be seriously undermined, and perhaps irreparably damaged.”

Ecumenical fallout was swift following General Convention 2003 and the subsequent consecration of V. Gene Robinson. In the wake of strong criticism and controversy surrounding his support of Robinson, Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold resigned his position as Anglican co-chair of the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) in November 2003, citing his concern about “not jeopardizing the present and future life and work of the Commission.” In addition, the Russian Orthodox Church severed ties with ECUSA and 21 Primates of the worldwide Anglican Communion have declared either impaired or broken communion with the Episcopal Church. In December 2003, IARCCUM dialogue was suspended as a result of the consecration.

“The Presiding Bishop and Episcopal News Service continue to present an inaccurate picture of the Episcopal Church as strong, healthy and ecumenically connected. That just isn’t true. Not only do the fractures in our church grow larger, but we are also seeing ecumenical relationships, formed over years of painstaking work together, thrown into crisis,” Bishop Duncan said. “We cannot and must not practice our faith in a vacuum without regard for the negative impact on the broader church. I would very much like to see a theological response from Bishop Griswold whose statements about the nature of communion in recent months are challenged so directly by this paper.”

To read the document in its entirety: http://www.anglicancommunion.org/ecumenical/documents/200406iarccum.pdf

END