You are here
LONDON: Hopes fade for mediating role of Panel of Reference
Church of England Newspaper
March 10, 2006
Hopes that the Archbishop of Canterbury's Panel of Reference can find a way through the fractious dispute over homosexuality are fading.
Canadian traditionalists this week accused the Panel's staff of bias and bureaucratic delay. Cheryl Chang, Executive Director of the Anglican Network in Canada [ANiC] told The Church of England Newspaper that the failure to provide safeguards for petitioners seeking alternative episcopal oversight, "is discouraging to parishes who are trying to work in the process called for by the Primates and established" by Archbishop Rowan Williams.
The Panel was created by Dr Williams after the February 2005 Primates' Meeting in Northern Ireland to offer mediation and guidance to "certain parishes" that "have been unwilling to accept the direct oversight of their diocesan bishops" for reasons of conscience. However, the Panel process has already drawn criticism from the Primates of the Anglican Communion for its dilatory pace.
Participants in the Panel process now tell The Church of England Newspaper that the structure of the process is flawed and have alleged bias by the Panel staff.
In early October 2005, ANiC filed a petition on behalf of 11 New Westminster parishes seeking alternative oversight. But Dr Brian Hanson, who staffs the panel, told the ANiC that it could not be a 'plaintiff' and asked for the names of clergy and congregations that sought oversight.
The group responded that they were unwilling to list names for fear of retribution. Their fears, it seems, were well founded when on October 11, New Westminster's diocesan council passed a resolution defining ANiC as a group "outside the structures" of the Church that sought to "promote an alternate Anglican structure in Canada". Bishop Michael Ingham subsequently fired one priest for joining the ANiC, Ms Chang claimed, and the Panel "can provide no protection from punitive actions from the diocese".
Hanson told Ms Chang that fear of retaliation was not an acceptable excuse. ANiC offered to amend its petition, listing Ms Chang and retired Bishop Don Harvey as petitioners. Panel Chairman, Archbishop Peter Carnley rejected this compromise and Ms Chang was told on March 6 that unless the petition was amended, "We won't allow it to go forward". Ms Chang said that four parish councils have agreed to stand behind the complaint and will submit their names as "plaintiffs". However, "the true plaintiff is the Network," she argued.
Ms Chang also claimed that the Panel was biased. She said that Dr Hanson's distillation of the 66-page submission to a single page was "something that could have been written by the New Westminster diocesan staff".
The quasi-legal language used by the Panel was also discouraging, Ms Chang said. "This is not a trial," she said. "We are not accusing anyone or seeking guilt or innocence," she explained, "we are seeking alternate oversight".
END
