From the national Anglican Church of Canada site: There is also "A Preliminary Response to the Draft Covenant by the Anglican Church of Canada", which is well worth reading for those who are so called. Related post here.
A Pastoral Statement from the Primate and Metropolitans of the Anglican Church of Canada
Greetings in the name of the One who was, who is, and who is to come -- our Lord Jesus Christ
The Mission Statement of the Anglican Church of Canada opens with these statements: “As a partner in the worldwide Anglican Communion and in the universal Church, we proclaim and celebrate the gospel of Jesus Christ in worship and in action. We value our heritage of Biblical faith, reason, liturgy, tradition, bishops and synods and the rich variety of our life in community.”
It is fundamental to the values and mission of our Church that we welcome and respect freedom of individual conscience and the theological convictions of a diverse membership. Our General Synods have consistently strived to honour every voice as the Church works through contentious and difficult issues before it. This is particularly true in the way the Church has endeavoured to address matters of human sexuality including the blessing of same-sex unions.
The report of the Primate's Theological Commission commonly known as the St. Michael Report has described this issue as matter of doctrine but not core doctrine. General Synod concurred with this opinion last June. The St. Michael Report also declared that the matter need not be a Communion-breaking issue.
It is in this context that we deplore recent actions on the part of the Primate and General Synod of the Province of the Southern Cone to extend its jurisdiction into Canada through the Essentials Network Conference. This action breaks fellowship within the Anglican Church of Canada and the Anglican Communion.
We affirm the statement unanimously agreed to by the Council of General Synod which appeals to the Archbishop of Canterbury “to make clear that such actions are not a valid expression of Anglicanism.” We too appeal to him in his capacity as one of the instruments of communion and as chair of the Primates' Meeting to address the very serious issues raised by this intervention.
The actions by the Primate of the Southern Cone are not necessary. Our bishops have made adequate and appropriate provision for the pastoral care and episcopal support of all members of the Anglican Church of Canada, including those who find themselves in conscientious disagreement with the view of their bishop and synod over the blessing of same-sex unions. These provisions, contained in the document known as Shared Episcopal Ministry, were adopted by the House of Bishops and commended by the panel of reference appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The actions by the Primate of the Southern Cone are also inappropriate. They contravene ancient canons of the Church going as far back as the 4th century, as well as statements of the Lambeth Conference, the Windsor report and the Communiqué from the Primates' Meeting earlier this year. Furthermore these actions violate Canon XVII of the Anglican Church of Canada which states that “No Bishop priest or deacon shall exercise ordained ministry in a diocese without the license or temporary permission of the Diocesan Bishop.”
Any ministry exercised in Canada by those received into the Province of the Southern Cone after voluntarily relinquishing the exercise of their ministry in the Anglican Church of Canada is inappropriate, unwelcome and invalid. We are aware that some bishops have, or will be making statements to that effect in their own dioceses.
In the meantime we rejoice in this season of Advent in which we once again begin that great journey of tracing the steps of our Lord's most holy life through the liturgy of a new year.
We rejoice in the gift of word and sacrament. We rejoice in the gift of our baptism and in the great gift of the Eucharist. We rejoice in the gift of the Holy Spirit who leads us into all truth and empowers us to proclaim the gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ in word and action.
We respect the diversity of opinion in our Church over many issues. We respect the manner in which we take counsel together and honour the intention of all those who even in the midst of struggle desire to remain within the fellowship of the Anglican Church of Canada.
Let us renew our trust in the One who holds us together in the embrace of His love and peace.
We call all Anglicans to a renewed emphasis on mission and prayer for faithful witness in the service of the gospel within our parishes and across the world.
In him whose Advent sets us free.
The Most Rev. Fred Hiltz, Archbishop and Primate
The Most Rev. Terry Buckle, Archbishop and Metropolitan of British Columbia and Yukon
The Most Rev. John Clarke, Archbishop and Metropolitan of Rupert's Land
The Most Rev. Caleb Lawrence, Archbishop and Metropolitan of Ontario
The Most Rev. Bruce Stavert, Archbishop and Metropolitan of Canada
And on another note:
Bishop Harvey declared the revolution in his Pastoral Charge to the newly launched Church: “There is no reference in the Bible to a diocese, border, or boundary. I have heard ‘Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel’. We have lawyers and doctors and engineers without borders. We are launching bishops without borders.
from Church of England Newspaper, November 30, 2007, on page 12,
article posted here


"...their ministry in the Anglican Church of Canada is inappropriate, unwelcome and invalid. "
Curious. Who would have thought in all of this that the ACC would take a Donatist line? I mean really 'invalid'. What is the grounds for this.
I guess when your shopping list of heresies reaches a certain point, what is the harm of adding Donatism?
Posted by: cpm | November 29, 2007 at 11:28 AM
Now then are you going to give us your view? ;-)
Posted by: Peter | November 29, 2007 at 04:37 PM
"The actions by the Primate of the Southern Cone are also inappropriate. They contravene ancient canons of the Church going as far back as the 4th century,...Furthermore these actions violate Canon XVII of the Anglican Church of Canada which states that “No Bishop priest or deacon shall exercise ordained ministry in a diocese without the license or temporary permission of the Diocesan Bishop.”
Holy Cow! All the Anglicans in the whole world are subject to the "ancient canons of the Church" AND to Canon 17 of the Anglican Church of Canada! Who knew? I feel so stupid. I've always assumed that General Synod made canons for the Anglican Church in Canada, not for Anglicans everywhere. Boy is our GS powerful or what.
It is really so pastorally helpful to know that the signatories are happy about Advent and happy to be Christians and that they esteem theological chaos and constant conversation, so long as its polite of course.
This letter has so many flaws. I'm not going to parse it any further. I am getting tired of making myself sick reading these sorts of statements.
Posted by: Susan | November 29, 2007 at 07:21 PM
And by the way, did anyone read this thing over before signing it? They have called all Anglicans to Mission and Faithful Witness in service of the Gospel. I suspect that is exactly what the Province of the Southern Cone would say it is doing.
Posted by: Susan | November 29, 2007 at 07:48 PM
It amazes me that intelligent people can live in such duality - while New West runs wild no one says anything...
My favorite is: "Our General Synods have consistently strived to honour every voice...". Didn't Michael Peers prevent the Zachaeus Fellowship from speaking at Synod '04 because he didn't feel they had anything useful to say?
Posted by: sameo416 | November 29, 2007 at 08:14 PM
Peter: My thoughts? I am but a humble parish pastor; such things, as the psalmist says, are too lofty for me.
But if I were forced, here is where I would begin. The shift of language: even the official communcations have dropped the "in the sense of being credal" from the "core doctrine" bit. And secondly, the letter states that the SMR "declared" that SSB "need not be" a communion breaking issue. Again, a shift in language. The initial report said “the Commission does not believe that this should be a communion-breaking issue.” This has now been upgraded to: the Commission “declared” that it “need not be” a communion breaking issue. Minor, perhaps, but a carelessness around language is unhelpful. It appears to move from the presentation of an opinion to the assertion of a fact.
Posted by: joseph | November 30, 2007 at 10:39 AM
Thanks Joeseph of the humble pastorate, I hoped I might draw you out a little. C'mon, you're a blogger, join the rest of us knee-jerk reactionaries. :-)
Posted by: Peter | November 30, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Peter: our knees should jerk, first and foremost downward in prayer :^)
blessed St Andrew's Day, which BTW, is an ordination anniversary for me. As St Andrew is also the patron of Scotland, and there is a Scottish line of Walkers, and one line of Walkers is associated with a certain product of Scotland, I can think of no better way of celebrating the Saint's day than by... Maybe I'll post a more detailed analysis later.
Posted by: joseph | November 30, 2007 at 12:27 PM
You're celebrating with shortbread? I'd have thought whisky was more your style.
Posted by: donald | November 30, 2007 at 03:26 PM
Donald: I'm thinking the other Walker clan. My middle name is Joseph, but my first name is Johnnie.
Posted by: joseph | November 30, 2007 at 03:40 PM
Well, then I'll drink a toast in your honour with Johnnie's buddy, Glen. Glenfiddich that is.
Posted by: Donald | November 30, 2007 at 05:45 PM
When you are down here, old boy, well have to find ways of celebrating with my Whisky collection :-)
Posted by: Peter | December 01, 2007 at 11:08 PM
FWIW, when the warden was done reading the pastoral letter before the beginning of the service proper, I asked if anyone had any questions. The only question was "who exactly is the Church of the Southern Cone?"
Posted by: Malcolm+ | December 02, 2007 at 09:20 PM
It's the Ice Cream Cone now (old joke, still like it though)
Posted by: Peter | December 03, 2007 at 04:28 PM
When I was done reading the letter one of my parishoners, a retired school principle, asked - "Could you now tell us what it said?"
The average person in the pew really has little idea nor cares overly much about what is happening at levels where they have little to no say. At times I feel like that. Why bother keeping up with what is happening when what I believe or feel will have no impact on the outcome? And then I think: "Na, I gotta be a thorn in someone's side, somewhere, somehow."
Love and Prayers,
Ann Marie
Posted by: Ann Marie | December 04, 2007 at 10:19 AM