Comments upon the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Letter of June 19, 2001 to the
Primates of S E Asia and Rwanda

1. It is easy to understand why, from within the perspective of George
Carey, the proposed actions of the two Primates scheduled for June 24 are
seen as treachery, betrayal and schismatic and much else. I think I know
why he is upset and angry and distressed of soul.

2. For George Carey there can only be one jurisdiction/church in one
geographical area [that is one Anglican Church in one area] and no single
jurisdiction has the authority to act within or intervene in the territory
of another jurisdiction. Each province has its own territory and should
keep to it. Any action to cause division or a parallel jurisdiction in the
territory of another – for whatever reason -- is schismatic. The Anglican
Communion is made up of autonomous provinces, and autonomous means
autonomous.


3. However, within the communion of autonomous provinces, George Carey sees
a special historical role for the See of Canterbury and it seems that this
is modeled on the relation that the Queen once had to the British
Commonwealth rather than what she has now. The British Empire was replaced
by the Commonwealth of Nations, which itself has developed with a
diminishing role for the Queen in it. It would seem that George Carey hangs
on to a role for the See of Canterbury that is outdated -- note how he says
“I gave no authority to the Province of S E Asia in 1996…” as though that
Province could not develop its own internal forms of authority since then.
In fact it seems that within the Comprehensiveness of Anglicanism both S E
Asia and Rwanda have developed their own evangelical doctrines of authority
and priorities in the Church of God and these are different from that
espoused by George and his advisers.

4. What George Carey has signally failed to do – in a public manner – is to
make very clear to the Presiding Bishop and Bishops of the ECUSA that he
will break communion with them if they do not repent and re-establish
historic orthodoxy in worship, doctrine, morality and order. Does not the
Archbishop realize that there was a major exodus over doctrine from the
ECUSA in the 1970’s and from this came the Continuing Anglican Churches?
They left for good reasons! And since then there have been continual
departures of fine people because of the increasing apostasy of the
institution of ECUSA, and from these the creation of the AMiA was made
possible. Does not George Carey realize that there is a sizeable Anglican
presence outside the ECUSA and that it is there primarily because of a deep
belief by many that ECUSA is an apostate Church [at least in its central
leadership]? Has he no sense of sympathy for these faithful people? Has
he any plans for them at all, or are they simply to be called schismatics?


5. What the Primates as a body have signally failed to do – in a public
manner – is to call the ECUSA leadership to repentance. They have treated
Presiding Bishop Griswold, as they did Presiding Bishop Browning, as if they
were orthodox Christian pastors, and have thus given them the benefit of
any doubt. However, individual Primates, who knew what is really going on
within the ECUSA, have made attempts to create a way of discipline for
erring Provinces (see the book To Mend the Net) but they have not been given
sufficient encouragement by George Carey or the majority of Primates. Thus
their proposal is in limbo.

6. What George Carey does not seem to realize is that the Church of South
India has also invaded the territory of the ECUSA and set up congregations
which are not in the ECUSA and are visited by a Bishop from India. Here is
a parallel province in embryo on the same territory. [And of course (a) the
Evangelical Lutheran Church with which the ECUSA has shared communion is in
competition geographically for territory and members with the ECUSA; and (b)
the Roman Catholic Church has as many as ten different jurisdictions
overlapping one another in the big cities of America!]


7. The solution required by George Carey that Bishops Rodgers and Murphy are
reconciled to the Presiding Bishop of ECUSA and come under the control of
the American house of Bishops is unworkable. They were consecrated in
Singapore and sent to the USA because of the conviction that the ECUSA is
apostate and so there is a duty to offer another Anglican Way and Presence
in the great land of America.

8. The way to solve the problem is for George Carey to change his doctrine of
the church and definition of schism. The time has come for the Anglican
Communion to allow the existence of parallel Provinces in countries or areas
(as there is right now in Europe with the British and American dioceses).
In this way the Church of England in S Africa could return to the official
Anglican Family where it belongs; and there could be created – out of the
Continuing Churches and the AMiA and parishes from the present ECUSA – a new
Province in the USA. Competition is part of the American experience and it
would be good for both ECUSA and the new entity. Let there be parallel
provinces wherever they are needed and let them come very soon or else we
shall have three of more Anglican Communions competing worldwide – that
headed by Canterbury, that headed by S E Asia and Rwanda and other
like-mined provinces in the South, and that now called the Traditional
Anglican Communion of the Continuing Churches worldwide.

The Rev’d Dr Peter Toon June 19th 2001