The Seinfeld Conference: A Reflection on Lambeth 2008
By George Conger
October 20, 2008

It could have been called the “Seinfeld Conference.” The once-a-decade gathering of Anglican bishops held this summer in Canterbury—the 2008 Lambeth Conference—was the conference about nothing.

Designed to avoid controversy, Lambeth 2008 set out to make no statements, take no stands, and avoid provoking new conflict within the Anglican Communion. By its own lights, the July 14 to August 3 meeting was a triumph for its organizer and host, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, for during those three weeks the oft foretold crack-up of the Anglican Communion did not happen. 

Yet bishops from both the left and right branded the conference a failure. Lambeth 2008 was about nothing, said nothing, and achieved nothing, and by its inaction, the Anglican Communion was left in a worse place than if it had never taken place at all, Archbishop Henry Orombi of Uganda said.

Divided over issues of doctrine and discipline, with homosexuality garnering the most media attention, the bishops refrained from hurling anathemas at one another and in the end issued a paper expressing mild statements of concern on global warming, poverty, disease, hunger, domestic violence and other generally bad things—while also mildly affirming—in a non-provocative way—generally good things: peace on earth, the brotherhood of mankind, and church unity.

Yet, Dr. Williams’ hopes that if the bishops “just kept on talking”, while avoiding discussion of the underlying issues dividing them---the person of Christ, the efficacy and nature of the sacraments, the place of Scripture within the church----a ceasefire would emerge and pan-Anglican bonhomie would prevail.   

“The miracle hasn’t happened,” evangelical leader Bishop Gregory Venables of Argentina said on Aug 2.  “It was a good try,” but Lambeth 2008 did not prevent the crack-up of the Anglican Communion.

At Lambeth 2008 Dr. Williams lost the confidence of his fellow archbishops, and left the communion millions in debt and on the same trajectory as before the Conference began. Left and right rejected his pleas for restraint, vitiating the renewed call for moratoria on gay bishops and blessings and cross-border episcopal actions, pending putative rescue by an Anglican Covenant at some future date.

New layers of bureaucracy—a “Pastoral Forum” and “Faith and Order Commission”—were proposed by Dr. Williams at Lambeth at a time when many saw stronger measures to restore order as overdue. Meanwhile, Roman Catholic and Orthodox representatives announced the effective end of talks aimed at corporate reunion and the recognition of Anglican orders.

“We talk but nothing is decided. People are frustrated,” said Bishop Venables, adding that Lambeth 2008 did not address these needs.

Boycott

On the opening day of the Lambeth Conference 617 bishops were registered from the communion’s 722 dioceses, five missionary districts, and two ecclesial jurisdictions (Macao and the Falklands/British Antarctic Territories).

Some 469 diocesan bishops, 140 suffragan and assistant bishops, and eight bishops without territorial sees accepted Dr. Williams’ invitation, with the largest block coming from the Episcopal Church of the United States—127 bishops.

In protest to the presence of the liberal Americans and Canadians, 214 bishops boycotted the conference. From Africa’s 324 dioceses, 200 diocesan bishops (61 percent) refused Dr. Williams’ invitation.

The Bishop of Lewes, Wallace Benn, a leader of the Evangelical wing of the Church of England on June 25 said he would not attend Lambeth as a matter of personal conscience, “I cannot be in fellowship with those [bishops] who have denied the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

In his opening address Dr. Williams acknowledged the absence of almost a third of the church’s bishops, representing the great majority of its active members. But he told the bishops and their spouses that the 14th Lambeth Conference would not seek to settle the conflict within the Communion, but would focus on building relationships. These friendships would not overcome the divisions, but “it is certain that without the building of relationships the challenges will never be resolved," he said according to bishops present.

Dr. Williams then outlined the structure of the meeting. The first three days would consist of a retreat, during which he would deliver five lectures to the bishops at Canterbury Cathedral, interspersed with periods of meditation and reflection. The business sessions would follow with the day beginning at 7:30 with worship and Bible study and going most nights until the late evening. The schedule also would include a day trip to London to participate in a march in support of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) before dining at Lambeth Palace and heading for Buckingham Palace for the customary tea party with the Queen.

The bishops were split into Bible study groups of eight brought together based on geography and gender. The Bible study groups would then re-form after a tea break into “indaba” groups of approximately 40 bishops and guests each; “Indaba,” a Zulu word, the bishops were told, was a consensus-building process by which African villagers would discuss issues in a town-hall fashion. Over 75 ecumenical guests ranging from the Salvation Army to an eight-man team from the Roman Catholic Church were included in all Conference deliberations.

In the afternoons and early evenings, before and after the closed worship services, the bishops would attend plenary sessions or self-select sessions. The latter sessions, closed to outsiders, would address issues of particular concern, from climate change to Catholicism, with several sessions scheduled simultaneously each business day.

A few open plenary sessions were scheduled in the evenings in a marquee - a blue tent that could accommodate roughly 1,000 people - while the day closed with evening prayer.

Dr. Williams acknowledged at the start of the conference, the communion was “in the middle of one of the most severe challenges,” but noted the “options before us are not irreparable schism or forced assimilation.” The way forward was through an Anglican Covenant - the pact proposed by the Windsor Report to help ensure unity in basic beliefs and mutual accountability among historically autonomous Anglican provinces.

A covenant would allow “an Anglicanism whose diversity is limited not by centralized control but by consent – consent based on a serious common assessment of the implications of local change.”

Conflict

The first open clash in the conference came on July 22, when the Episcopal Church of the Sudan released a statement calling for the Episcopal Church to repent and immediately cease its advocacy of gay bishops and blessings. Three Roman Catholic cardinals attending the conference then rained on Dr. Williams’ parade, offering progressively harsher assessments of the state of Anglicanism and its relations with Rome.

The Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor urged Anglicans to put their house in order, and decide what they believe. “If Anglicans themselves disagree” over contentious issues like women priests “and find yourselves unable fully to recognize each other’s ministry, how could we?”

Dialogue between Anglicans and Roman Catholics now appeared pointless due to the ecclesiological anarchy spreading across the communion. “If we are to make progress through dialogue, we must be able to reach a solemn and binding agreement with our dialogue partners. And we want to see a deepening, not a lessening, of communion in their own ecclesial life,” Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor said.

The Russian Orthodox Church was blunt. Women or homosexual bishops would exclude “even the theoretical possibility of the Orthodox churches acknowledging the apostolic succession” of Anglican bishops, Bishop Hilarion of Vienna told Dr. Williams on July 28.

In its closing week, the conference turned to a discussion of the Anglican Covenant.  Liberal bishops objected to the creation of a mechanism that would impose constraints upon theological and liturgical experimentation, while conservatives expressed fears a covenant would be too little, too late.

A second committee called the Windsor Continuation Group (WCG), created by Dr. Williams earlier this year, briefed the bishops on recommendations for repairing the broken fellowship between the U.S. Church and a dozen churches from the developing world.

The WCG called for maintenance on the ban on gay bishops and blessings and for the creation of a “Pastoral Forum” tasked with responding to future conflicts within the communion. However, in the case of both the Covenant and the WCG, the bishops at Lambeth were only briefed on the work of the committees; they were not given the authority to develop the relevant documents.

On August 3, the conference released a closing statement that noted the broad desire for a “season of gracious restraint” marked by abstentions from the consecration and blessing of partnered homosexuals, and foreign incursions into the jurisdictions of the North American provinces.

Written as a “Reflections” paper, the 42-page statement was described as a “narrative” of the meeting, and attempted to summarize the bishops’ discussions. It was not a consensus document or a position paper. The bishops were asked not whether they agreed with the document, but “whether they could see their voices” amidst the various reflections it contains.

Looking Forward

In the closing press conference, Dr. Williams said Lambeth had proven that the bishops could speak to each other respectfully and prayerfully, and had a “strong commitment to remain unified.”

Dr. Williams also acknowledged that unlike the 1998 conference, which ended with a one million-pound surplus, the 2008 conference had run into debt. According to an internal Conference document distributed to registered bishops, the budget for the meeting was £5.6 million excluding travel costs. On August 11, the Board of Governors of the Church Commissioners of the Church of England extended an emergency loan of £600,000 to help cover the estimated £1.2 million shortfall.

“The pieces are on the board” for the resolution of the Anglican conflict, Williams asserted. “And in the months ahead it will be important to invite those absent from Lambeth to be involved in these next stages.”

However, as of October 16, eight weeks after the close of the conference, Dr. Williams has yet to contact the boycotting bishops to take part in the “next stages.”     

Nor has his delivered August 3 promise that “within the next two months” a “clear and detailed specification for the task and composition of a Pastoral Forum” would be delivered that included the “perspectives of various groups” within the communion.  Queries by IRD as to the status of the forum to Dr. Williams’ press officer have so far gone unanswered.

As per Dr. Williams’ plan, nothing happened at Lambeth. Yet the Anglican Communion still came apart. “We have gotten this far without formally announcing our division, but we [just] haven’t announced it” yet, Bishop Venables said. While homosexuality appeared to be a presenting issue, the real “division is over what it means to be a Christian, what it means to be a church,” he added.

The idea of a moratorium on gay bishops and blessings was “attractive,” but it was clear that the “North Americans will not stop doing what they are doing, and they have said so,” he noted. “And I’m not going to stop now” in supporting North American faithful, he said, “There is no safe place for them.”

 There are “no ground rules to define Anglican Church,” and we now have “no way of avoiding the division,” Bishop Venables said.

The leaders of the liberal wing of the American church were not sanguine about the communion’s future prospects, either. Bishop John Chane of Washington declared he would not obey the ban on gay blessings. “I for one will not ask for any more sacrifices to be made by persons in our church who have been made outcasts because of their sexual orientation.”

“The Anglican Communion must face the hard truth that when we scapegoat and victimize one group of people in the church, all of us become victims of our own prejudice and sinfulness,” Bishop Chane said.  The bishops of Los Angeles, Newark, Massachusetts, and California also stated their opposition to the ban, while Archbishop Fred Hiltz said it was unlikely there would be a “rollback” on same-sex blessings in Canada.

U.S. Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori stated that in the Episcopal Church the “overwhelming majority of the bishops” believed the “the well being and adequate and appropriate pastoral care of gay and lesbian members” was a “significant mission issue.”  She foresaw a day when the Episcopal Church would consecrate its next gay bishop and would regularize rites for gay blessings.

Up until now, the Anglican Communion has held together “by appealing to diversity,” Bishop Venables said.

However, “Can we sacrifice what we believe for unity?” Venables said. “I don’t think we can make that decision on the spur of the moment. It is unfair to ask people to sacrifice their convictions for the sake of a unity that is by no means certain.”

The call for dialogue over action had failed to prevent a split, Venables argued. “I hoped we would be able to talk about very serious things, we tried to but were unable to.”