American, Canadian, and Scottish heterodox bishops are lining up on one side while the orthodox bishops of the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches (GSFA) arelining up on the other.

GSFA is a grouping of 24 Anglican Provinces and churches (quasi-provinces) including: Alexandria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Central Africa, Chile, the Congo, Sydney, the Indian Ocean, Kenya, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nigeria, North America (ACNA), Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, South America, Southeast Asia, South Sudan, the Sudan, Southern Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and West Africa.

The Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches is dedicated to maintaining Anglican authenticity and integrity through ensuring that the Faith once delivered, as outlined in Jude 2, is maintained through the Anglican Communion.

The GSFA has already served the first volley. It has called a news conference for Friday (July 29) for credentialed media -- VirtueOnline will be in attendance -- at which point the Primates of the Global South Fellowship of Anglicans will announce its "Four Priorities" and how they relate to the 2022 Lambeth Conference, The Global South primates prayerfully plan to fulfill them as this Lambeth unfolds.

The Four Priorities are:
1: Foster the Unity of the Orthodox, whilst being a faithful witness, and defender of 'the Faith once delivered;

2: Sound a 'Clarion Call' to Biblical Faithfulness, including seeking the 're-affirmation of Lambeth 1.10' as the 'official teaching' of the Anglican Church on marriage and sexuality;

3: Stand by GSFA's principle of not being a 'breakaway group' from the Anglican Communion. (GSFA sees itself, and seeks to be part of, the 'holy remnant' that God has preserved in the Anglican Communion); and

4: Spur on the faithful in the Communion to get the Gospel out into the world, earnestly defending the purity of the faith in order that it might be propagated to a lost and needy world.

The liberal bishops are already crying foul. There is already a movement to eliminate the Lambeth Call on Human Dignity from the announced agenda in the upcoming Lambeth Conference.

JUSTIN WELBY (THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY)

I am greatly looking forward to being with you in Canterbury next week. As you set out on your journeys from around the world, I thank God for this opportunity to be together in prayer, study and conversation.

This year's Lambeth Conference will be focused on the major global crises of our time, their impact on the most vulnerable, and our Gospel imperative to serve a world in need. This is a historic opportunity to hear from each other about the opportunities and challenges we face in sharing the Good News of Jesus Christ in our diverse contexts around the world -- and to pray for and affirm each other in those ministries.

I know that many of you are reading and praying about the draft Lambeth Calls that have been published this week -- and they are naturally the subject of debate ahead of the conference. Indeed, these Calls have grown out of a process of discussion and encounter with one another. They are informed by the insights and themes of the online video conversations between bishops across the world over the past year. They have been drafted by a diverse group of Anglicans -- male and female, lay and ordained, from different generations and from every part of the Communion. They are one part of a process that began before this part of the Conference, and will continue long after it formally finishes, as every Province discerns its own response to the Calls in their own contexts.

As you prepare your hearts and minds for this gathering, I pray that we all reflect on the draft Call on Anglican Identity, which states that Anglicans "belong to a tradition that seeks faithfulness to God in richly diverse cultures, distinct human experiences, and deep disagreements." That call also states: "The Anglican Communion is a gift from God. Governed by Scripture, affirming the ancient creeds, sacramentally centered, and episcopally led -- Anglicans seek to be faithful to God in their agreement and in their disagreements."

Without ignoring those things on which we deeply disagree, I pray that we will approach this gathering with an even deeper sense of what unites us: the love of Jesus Christ and his calling to serve God's world.

Be assured of my continuing prayers for you all -- now and in the weeks to come.

SCOTTISH EPISCOPAL CHURCH COLLEGE OF BISHOPS

"Human Dignity features as one of the topics, the call for which includes a reaffirmation of the 1998 Lambeth Conference Resolution I.10 and defines marriage as permissible only between a man and woman. The wording of that call does not represent the position of the Scottish Episcopal Church as reflected in the Church's Canons, which recognises that there are differing understandings of marriage in the SEC. The Conference calls are not binding on provinces and are yet to be discussed. The members of the College of Bishops will seek to amend the draft call on Human Dignity urging a more inclusive approach and will work in respectful dialogue both with those colleagues across the Communion who would share the position adopted by the Scottish Episcopal Church, and with those who may differ."

IAN PATON (BISHOP OF St ANDREWS DUNKELD & DUNBLANE) OF THE SCOTTISH EPISCOPAL CHURCH

THE "CONTROVERSY". The "Call" on Human Dignity (Pg 31) will not find support from everyone, especially from me and the other Scottish Bishops and many others. The draft "Call" includes the statement: "We call for ... a reaffirmation of Lambeth 1.10 with upholds marriage and requires deeper work to uphold the dignity and witness of LGBTQ Anglicans," and "It is in the mind of the Anglican Communion as a whole that same-gender marriage is not permissible." Lambeth 1.10 refers to the Lambeth Conference of 1998 which led to the confrontation between those who supported LGBT+ rights in the Church and those who rejected them. The draft "Call" to reaffirm flies in the face of the journey towards LGBT+ inclusion and human rights, and our own SEC position that affirms equal marriage and respects conscience.

The Conference will debate this draft "Call," and Bishops from the SEC will join those from other Provinces who seek to persuade not to adopt such a divisive "Call," about to amend the final version. Even if passed by a majority at Lambeth, this is a "Call" not a "Resolution," no Province will be bound by it, and the SEC's settled position on inclusion and equal marriage is not going to change. But for Lambeth to issue such a "Call" would give the impression of an Anglican Communion still out of touch with the lives of the LGBT+ people.

SUSAN BELL (XII NIAGARA, CANADA)

I know there has been concern over the proposed reaffirmation of Lambeth Resolution 1.10. Please be assured that in our discussions, in our fellowship, and in our conclusions, I will bear witness to the many decisions we have made in the Diocese of Niagara to embrace equal marriage and uphold the dignity of every human being.

STEPHEN LONDON (EDMONTON, CANADA)

I do have to say I was extremely disappointed to see in the resolution about Human Dignity that there is a call to reaffirm Lambeth resolution I.10, from 1998, which is against marriage equality for our LGBTQ+ community. This goes against what I thought we were doing in speaking where we find we have a common mind as a communion. It is clear that there is no common mind on this issue. There are groups working already to remove this from the Lambeth Call, and I will work to support this effort. I am committed to marriage equality in this diocese and, as our document Finding our Way says, "we will affirm and declare publicly, intentionally, and explicitly our commitment to the welcome, safety and full access of siblings in the LGBTQ2SIA+ communities within our churches."

JONATHAN CLARK (UK BISHOP OF CROYDON-RETIRED)

The principle is that resolutions of the Lambeth Conference (or Calls, for that matter) express only the majority view of that particular Conference. It is up to each Province to decide what authority they may have: "Member churches have distinct processes for receiving decisions from Lambeth Conferences and deciding/discerning to what extent they will have authority in their context." Lambeth 1998 1:10 cannot of itself express 'the mind of the Communion'.

And in practice, it clearly doesn't. Eight provinces of the Communion have in whole or part begun to make provision for the blessing of same gender relationships. The Church of England is part way through a process which was explicitly designed on the basis of exploring the whole range of views and experiences, openly and without prejudice. Those voices, those people are pre-emptively silenced in this document.

ANDREW NUNN (II DEAN OF SOUTHWARK CATHEDRAL-UK)

"One specific Lambeth Call is already causing damage, hurt and pain and that is the call to reaffirm Lambeth 1.10. This was the declaration made at the 1998 Lambeth Conference which affirmed a traditional view of sexuality and relationships, of marriage and the views of the church about homosexuality in particular. We have been struggling to live with Lambeth 1.10 since then but out of those struggles has emerged much more understanding of different positions, different beliefs, different readings of Scripture, we have been brought into a place of greater trust and mutual respect. At the same time, society, especially western society and not least of our own has moved on dramatically. As Dorothy in 'Wizard of Oz' would say 'we're not in Kansas anymore'; we are not in 1998 anymore..."

PRESIDING BISHOP MICHAEL CURRY - THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH

Our church is on record--both officially and in practice--with our commitment to the full inclusion of all who seek to follow Jesus and his way of love. As we head to the Lambeth Conference, the same dedication leading us to the full welcome, embrace, and inclusion of LGBTQ+ children of God likewise commit us to communion with one another across our differences. We will be true to who we are while upholding our relationships and engaging in real and open conversation.

We are not avoiding it (Mary Glasspool's "wife" not invited to Lambeth). We are being prayerful, thoughtful, strategic about what is the loving action for us. We, as a House (of Bishops), are now thinking and considering what are the creative possibilities and loving ways that we can bear witness to the Way of Love that we are committed to as the way of following Jesus.

EMMA INESON (I BISHOP TO THE ARCHBISHOPS OF CANTERBURY & YORK)

Lambeth Calls have replaced "resolutions," moving away from divisive decisions on contested issues in favour of guidance to be interpreted locally. The Calls are "discussion documents" and would be further shaped by the bishops. This was not the last word.

ANTHONY POGGO (THE SECRETARY GENERAL-DESIGNATE OF THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION)

Each province is autonomous, and the Archbishop of Canterbury had no executive authority over any province other than his own. But they (the Anglican Provinces) were one family united in the love of Jesus Christ, and like any other family there were issues of relationships, issues, or disputes.

EUGENE SUTTON (XIV MARYLAND)

Ours is one of many provinces. We are in a minority position on the issue of human sexuality. I know what it means to be a minority. I just make a plea for my brothers and sisters who have the majority opinion to keep us in the room. Be in the room with us and don't kick us out. Let us explain what the dignity of every human being means in our context.

What does it say if someone doesn't want to sit with me due to my views on sexuality? That they value more their view than the ability to sit together.

AUDREY SCANLAN (XI CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA)

One of the reasons the reasons my husband will not be attending Lambeth is that the spouses of the gay bishops of the Anglican Communion have not been invited. One of our recent Lambeth Conferences has declared that marriages is between a man and a woman.

So the last time Lambeth gathered, the gay bishop of the Episcopal Church was not invited to attend. This time our gay brothers and sisters are invited to attend -- those who are in episcopal orders -- but their spouses are not.

Many of them will be coming anyway and attending parallel activities. But, in solidarity with those who have not been invited, my husband has elected to stay home.

ROBERT SKIRVING (VIII EAST CAROLINA)

With this letter to you, I wish to affirm a number of personal commitments:
First, I affirm my continuing commitment that the sacrament of marriage will be open to all people in the Diocese of East Carolina.

Second, I affirm my commitment to stand in support of my LGBTQIA+ siblings during the time that I am with my colleagues at the Lambeth Conference. As a sign of this commitment, Sandy and I made the difficult decision that she would not accept the Archbishop's invitation to travel to Lambeth with me, to participate in a parallel program designed for spouses, since the spouses of my gay and lesbian colleagues were not similarly invited.

MARC ANDRUS (VIII CALIFORNIA)

I join with many Episcopal Church bishops, the bishops of the Scottish Episcopal church, and in the days to come, I'm sure with many other bishops of the Communion in expressing my dismay at the "Lambeth Calls" document that was abruptly distributed two Anglican bishops on the eve of the Lambeth Conference. Both the timing and the content of the document are problematic and that they offer little opportunity for those of us who disagree to voice our dissent.

What is objectionable about the Lambeth Calls document? Let me focus on two areas of concern: 1) the apparent attempt to fast track a Communion-wide stance that accords with the Archbishop of Canterbury's own stand on human sexuality; and 2) the nature of his position, which is to oppose same-gender marriage (see page 31 of the "Lambeth Calls" document, in the section on Human Dignity).

The Episcopal Church will not go backward on our affirmation of the full rights of the LGBTQ community, and certainly this diocese, which has long been a leader in this area, will be resolute.

ROBERT FITZPATRICK (V HAWAII)

One of the proposed "calls" suggests there will be possible reaffirmation of the 1998 Lambeth Conference Resolution 1.10 that defined marriage permissible only between a man and a woman. The wording of that "call" does not represent the position of the Diocese of Hawaii or The Episcopal Church.

KEVIN NICHOLS (VII BETHLEHEM)

1: "It is the mind of the Anglican Communion as a whole that same-gender marriage is not permissible." (1.10 - 1998)
2: "Legitimizing or blessing same-sex unions cannot be advised." (1.10 - 1998)
3: "It is a mind of the Communion to uphold "faithfulness in a marriage between a man and a woman and a lifelong union." (1.10 - 1998)

Needless to say, this is creating deep concern among our siblings in Christ who are in same-sex unions, as well as for those we believe our Baptismal Covenant when we say that we will strive for justice and peace among all people and respect the dignity of every human being. (BCP 304-5)

Be assured that in the Episcopal Diocese of Bethlehem, we shall stand in word and deed with our siblings who are in same-gender relationships. We will continue to honor our shared Creation in the image of God, because God is a God of all people.

NICHOLAS KNISELY (XII RHODE ISLAND)

The unexpected release of a series of Lambeth Conference Call statements on assorted subjects, and the equally unexpected news that bishops attending the Lambeth Conference next week would be voting on them, has knocked a bunch of Anglicans around the world back on their heels. Some in the Communion are delighted with this sudden turn -- but most of the voices I hear are dismayed. And here in the Episcopal Church, many people in our Province and in our diocese are apprehensive or even frightened. It's hard enough to be out as a LGBTQIA+ Christian (in both the church and the wider LGBTQIA+ community) and this sudden return to the conflict that wracked the life of the wider church for the past decades isn't going to make it any easier.

I don't have answers -- and perhaps never will, but as an old friend said to me once, when something seems illogical on the surface, try following the money and see if that will make things clearer.

MATTHEW GUNTER (VIII FOND Du LAC)

CONSTERNATION

We received the drafts of these calls last week. I expect nearly all of them will receive near unanimous affirmation. Controversially, the draft Lambeth Call on Human Dignity includes the suggestion that we vote on affirming Lambeth 1:10 -- a resolution from Lambeth 1998 that says Christian marriage is only between a man and a woman. This is a surprise to many of us. We certainly expected to have conversations about a wide range of issues and it is not surprising that this might be a topic of discussion. But voting on it strikes many of us as problematic.

It should be no surprise that many bishops will want to affirm the historic understanding of marriage and this might well be a majority. But such a declaration of a majority will do nothing to lessen the threat to the lives and flourishing of LGBTQ people who are members of every province of the Communion. It may well exacerbate it. Therefore, many bishops have expressed concern and are committed to finding a different way. I am committed to finding a different way.

What the bishops affirm together is not insignificant, and we will want to take each affirmation seriously. But nothing the bishops say there will be binding on every province. The dioceses of Wisconsin, including Fond du Lac and Eau Claire have made it clear that LGBTQ people are welcome in our congregations, most of which have declared themselves prepared to celebrate same-sex marriages. It will also not change the fact that we will continue to recognize that many of our members disagree with that position. They, too, are welcome. Nor will it change the fact that we will continue to strive to engage one another with honesty, charity, generosity, and holy curiosity.

THE BISHOPS OF NORTH CAROLINA
Sam Rodman (XII North Carolina)
Anne Hodges-Copple - Suffragan

Early this week we received some study materials including some draft documents titled "Lambeth Calls." These documents include affirmations and calls to action on Mission, Evangelism, Christian Unity, Reconciliation and Creation Care. One proposed "Call" addresses marriage in a manner that is giving us great pause, particularly because it contradicts the canons of The Episcopal Church. Until these documents arrived in our inboxes, we had no idea such plans were being put together for votes to be taken. Both of us feel misled as well as disappointed to realize there was this particular agenda revealed so close to our departure.

That said, no action at Lambeth will undo or supersede the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church. We will go forward maintaining a commitment to engagement and active listening, as well as giving witness to the Gospel as we are seeing it lived out in our diocese and beyond.

IAN DOUGLAS (XIV CONNECTICUT)

In the Call on Human Dignity, there is the highly problematic mention of the 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1:10 on human sexuality. Referring to Lambeth 1:10, the Call specifically states in paragraph 2:3 that: "It is the mind of the Anglican Communion as a whole that same gender marriage is not permissible." That statement is simply not true. The Episcopal Church fully includes LGBTQ+ siblings in the life and sacraments of the Church and supports marriage equality. Other churches in the Anglican Communion are equally supportive of LGBTQ+ people. To say that "It is the mind of the Anglican Communion as a whole that same gender marriage is not permissible" denies the faith and doctrine of our church and is highly injurious to married LGBTQ+ couples in our church. The fact that our Bishop-elect Jeff is happily married to his husband Paul, and that there are many blessed married LGBTQ+ couples in ECCT cannot be denied. I am sorry for the ongoing pain and suffering that this restatement of Lambeth 1:10 is causing to LGBTQ+ siblings in Christ; and I cannot be party to such oppressive and hurtful actions.

SEAN ROWE (VIII WESTERN NEW YORK & I PROVISIONAL NORTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA)

The official term for what we will do is "affirm" these calls, and in keeping with that term, there will not be an option to vote no--only to affirm each statement or to say that we will commit ourselves to further discernment. This surprise announcement was particularly distasteful to many Episcopal Church bishops because one of the "calls" asks us to affirm a statement made by the 1998 Lambeth Conference, known as Lambeth 1.10, that many of us understand to be homophobic and harmful to faithful LGBTQ Christians across the world.

I am extremely dismayed about this sudden reversal of everything we have been told for years about the purpose and format of this Lambeth Conference. But I am not surprised that we have, yet again, been subjected to the kind of political subterfuge that seems too often to be a hallmark of Anglican Communion politics.

SUSAN BROWN SNOOK (V SAN DIEGO)

The 2022 conference was advertised as a path to reconciliation, because we would not be trying to legislate anything; we would be praying, studying the Bible together, and building relationships. This hope for reconciliation was an attempt to paper over the differences that came into stark view in 1998, when Lambeth Resolution 1.10 "rejected homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture," and declared that the gathered bishops "cannot advise the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions nor ordaining those involved in same gender unions."

One week before the conference opened, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby released a "study document" for the conference called "Lambeth Calls." The document is a series of white papers on various issues before the church. The "Calls" were drafted by an opaque process that the archbishop claims included many diverse participants, but the only authors listed in the document are nine male bishops and one male layperson, apparently hand-picked by Archbishop Welby. These "Calls" were dropped on us one week before the conference with instructions to study them and come prepared to vote "yes," or "this needs more discernment;" there is no option to vote "no."

That is where the uproar started. Buried on page 31 of this 60-page document that we had no input in and that was dropped on us at the last minute, in the section on Human Dignity, is the "call" to "reaffirm" the Lambeth 1.10 declaration that homosexual practice should be rejected as incompatible with Scripture.

Well, of course I am not prepared to "reaffirm" any such thing, nor to "discern" it further. My conviction is to vote a flat-out "no" -- but that is not an option in the process they have outlined. A large majority of Episcopal bishops share my view, and the backlash against this opaque process, unfair voting procedure, and underhanded last-minute surprise has been intense. Conversation is happening widely across the church (and, I believe, across other Anglican churches that share our views). I expect that there will be a united approach to this request, which will unfold in the few days between now and August 2, when this "Call" is scheduled for discussion and voting.

JENNIFER ANNE REDDALL (VI ARIZONA)
"I voted against human dignity."

A mere week before the Lambeth Conference was to begin, we bishops all received a 60-page document (!) titled the "Lambeth Calls" and were told to read each section as we would be given an electronic voting device at the conference to either "affirm" the call or indicate that "This call is not yet clear and needs more conversation." There is no option to vote a clear "no."

The very idea of voting on anything is explicitly different from what we had been led to expect from this conference. No longer are we focused on developing relationships across differences; now we are focused on establishing what sort of differences are allowed--and what sort are not.

Because contained within the calls (reportedly developed by a group of lay and ordained, male and female scholars, but which lists only 10 male bishops as authors) lies a deliberate poison pill: a statement that affirms that it is the mind of the Anglican Communion that Christian marriage is only that between one man and one woman, and that same-sex marriage is not a faithful Anglican practice, and using a much-pilloried resolution passed by the Lambeth Conference in 1998 in support.

It is simply not true that there is a single mind in the Anglican Communion about same-sex marriage. A number of bishops who are attending will be doing so while their same-sex spouses gather in Canterbury, excluded from the conference as a whole. A number of provinces--not just the Episcopal Church--offer marriage equality or are on the way to doing so.

It is hard not to assume that this is intentional. And it has left a poor taste in my mouth as I prepare for Lambeth. There ought to be no deceit in following Christ.

But it is not an equal conversation when you vote at the end of it. And I mourn the loss of goodwill and my own optimism that has gone with it.

THOMAS BROWN (X MAINE)

***Even though Bishop Brown's homosexual spouse, a male Episcopal priest, has not been invited he will be accompanying the gay bishop to England***

It's a big deal to be invited to Lambeth. The presence of LGBTQ people throughout the world required, it seems to me, that the Archbishop of Canterbury reckons with the fact that LGBTQ people are part of our church and they're part of our faith communities, and they are proclaiming the gospel.

JOHN TAYLOR (VII LOS ANGELES)

This week word comes that we'll be issued electronic voting devices and asked, among other things, to vote on (they call it "affirm," so I guess they're electronic affirmation devices) Lambeth's notorious, communion-rivening statement in 1998, known as Lambeth I.10, that biblical marriage can only be between a man and a woman. If we don't vote yes, we can vote that a question needs more discernment. As of now, we won't be able to stand up decisively for people's God-given human rights and vote no.

It was bad enough that spouses of gay bishops weren't invited to Lambeth. Our Anglican Communion office hosts intimated that this was their grudging accommodation to conservative bishops around the world. It's harder to believe that proposition now that "Lambeth Calls" is out of the closet.

MARK EDINGTON (VII TEC in EUROPE)

I suppose you could just declare yourself to be a Conscientious Objector to the idea of using a consultative meeting for the purpose of up-or-down votes claiming to be binding in some way, and leave your "electronic device" somewhere it can't register one or another form of "yes." (I am thinking that is what I'll do.) Or you could try to collect an actual consultative conversation among willing participants in a place apart from the Family Feud tally board.

Whatever happens, it won't be the gathering that was first on the invitation. No wonder the Queen ditched the garden party.

KELVIN HOLDSWORTH (XIV PROVOST OF ST. MARY'S CATHEDRAL IN GLASGOW, SCOTLAND)

***He is openly homosexual***

Buried deep in the Lambeth Calls we find that the bishops are going to be invited to affirm a resolution which suggests that Lambeth 1.10 represents "the mind of the whole of the Anglican Communion" and which once again suggests that it isn't legitimate for Anglicans to bless same-sex couples or marry same-sex couples.

Apart from anything else, it must be blatantly obvious to everyone in the world that the Anglican Communion is not of one mind about this. It bewilders me that anyone could suggest that it is. For to state that it is a bald, bare-faced lie.

In one sense, it is deja vu all over again. We seem to have been here before, with the legitimacy of gay lives being up for debate. Such a debate is homophobic and seems even more so when one discovers that the bishops can't vote against it -- they can only vote in favour or vote in a way that suggests that the (resolution) Call needs more work.

END