In commenting on today’s interview given by the Archbishop of Canterbury to the Telegraph reference has been made to the Hurd report.
See these ACNS press releases from September 2001:
But the full text of the report which was previously published on the websites of both the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Anglican Communion Office is no longer available at either place (both sites have undergone several major rebuilds since 2001, so that is not altogether surprising).
I have therefore made the full text of the report available here.
Information on Lord Hurd of Westwell is available here.
“Anglican Communion d. Steps should be taken to establish a post at episcopal level at Lambeth funded by the Anglican Communion to act as the Archbishop of Canterbury’s right hand in Anglican Communion affairs, with a view to its holder deputising wherever practicable for the Archbishop in the Anglican Communion, and helping to coordinate support with the Anglican Communion Office. The post holder should come from the Anglican Communion overseas, and be selected by the Archbishop in consultation with the Anglican Consultative Council and Primates;” This would seem to be the part of the report that the ABC was referring… Read more »
Is this, in fact, a time for the traditional Role of Archbishop of Canterbury to become even more magisterial (like Rome) but with candidates from outside of the Province of Canterbury? – Father Ron. Absolutely not! Let’s be clear, the “traditional role of the Archbishop of Canterbury” is to be (1) the diocesan bishop for the diocese of Canterbury, a role that pre-dates by many years the break with Rome and (2) to be the Metropolitan of the southern province of the Church of England, a role which significantly pre-dates the concept of an Anglican Communion. Candidates for the position… Read more »
I always think there is a danger of being very short-sighted about all this and to pretend that this is not something the Anglican Communion hasn’t been grappling with ….. well almost as long as it has existed as a separate Church and then assembly of Churches, is not helpful. Let’s just look back to Robert Runcie’s opening address to the Lambeth Conference in 1988 “The Nature of the Unity we Seek” quoted here in the ENS piece: http://www.episcopalarchives.org/cgi-bin/ENS/ENSpress_release.pl?pr_number=88167 “Do we actually need a worldwide communion?” he asked. “Is our worldwide family of Christians worth bonding together? Or is our… Read more »
Zizioulas’ remarks form part of an interesting and well researched, though I think essentially flawed, essay by Dr Michael Poon already discussed here On TA back in the Spring of 2010.
http://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/archives/004299.html
Taking out the advocacy for the Covenant – and accepting how Poon finesses such things as WO – I think it’s worth re-reading as the essay does give a perspective for the present and ongoing discussion about the Communion and the role(s) of the Archbishop of Canterbury.
“all candidates must be British Citizens since the archbishops of the Church of England are ex-officio members of the House of Lords”
I can’t imagine this being the case. At the very least, a Commonwealth citizen (what used to be called a “British subject”) who relocates to the UK would be enfranchised just like any other UK resident eligible to vote, and thus presumably to sit in Parliament. Whether it would be different if a bishop were translated from, say, Ireland or the United States, I couldn’t say.
Geoff, You are right. I’ve now located the briefing paper from the Secretary General of the General Synod (GS Misc 1019). It’s at http://thinkinganglicans.org.uk/uploads/gsmisc1019.html and in the Q&A section near the bottom it states, “11. Are all bishops from within the Anglican Communion eligible for consideration as the next Archbishop of Canterbury? Since the Archbishop of Canterbury is automatically a member of the House of Lords he must, under the law of the land be a British, Irish or Commonwealth citizen. The person chosen will be someone whom the CNC considers to be best able to fulfil the full range… Read more »
I think it’s perhaps important to remember that being in communion with Canterbury is primarily to be in communion with the see of Canterbury, and not just with the Archbishop of Canterbury. The papal model shifts that around, personalising it in one person; and it can (and arguably has) led to the model of papal universal jurisdiction, which is an alternative to the communion of churches qua churches. John Zizioulas has written on this in a number of places…..
“We must never make the survival of the Anglican Communion an end in itself. The Churches of the Anglican Communion have never claimed to be more than a part of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Anglicanism has a radically provisional character which we must never allow to be obscured.” – Archbishop Robert Runcie – (via Martin Reynolds) As Martin points out here, one-time ABC Robert Runcie had a different perspective on the role of the Archbishop and Province of Canterbury as being Head of a ‘world-wide Church’ – akin to the Roman Catholic model. He recognised that the… Read more »