The Lambeth Commission on Communion - Documents

 

Notes on the submissions to the Lambeth Commission on Communion

Overview of submissions from groups and individuals received between 12 June and 3 September 2004

As far as possible, the themes and views expressed in the submissions are outlined under the appropriate key question below. As with previous submission, few correspondents responded directly to the questionnaire of the Lambeth Commission and the headings serve only loosely as captions for people’s comments. The number of submissions articulating a particular point is stated, however, similar views may have been implicit in other submissions.

Whilst schism was considered inevitable in a significant number of the earlier submissions, a prevalent hope expressed in the more recent submissions summarised below was that unity could and should be sustained, both within ECUSA and among the Anglican Communion. This hope was not wholly constrained to those accepting the actions of ECUSA and the Anglican Church in Canada but was also expressed by some individuals opposed to these actions and by groups whose membership represents a broad spectrum of views:

“We hold to the view that the values that unite MU members around the world are far greater than any single issue which might divide it, even though our research already tells us that MU members’ views on sexuality are as diverse as those within the Anglican Communion” Central Trustees of the world-wide Mothers’ Union

“ …as an organisation, we have taken no position on the confirmation [of Bishop Robinson]. What unites us across our many individual beliefs is Unity itself. All of us are committed to working to keep everyone at the table because we continue to believe that what we share is far greater than what separates us.” Via Media USA

The notion that ‘whilst we may not be of one mind, we could be of one heart’ was taken a step further in many submissions which considered the holding together of difference to be both characteristic of and important to the Anglican Communion. Images of ‘family’, ‘trinity’ and ‘parts of the Body of Christ’ were used.

“Neither Primates nor bishops speak for all the souls in their care, and until recently conscientious dissent was considered an acceptable, faithful activity within our church. Even today the majority of ECUSA is perfectly willing to break bread with those who conscientiously dissent from our Convention’s actions.”

The via media was endorsed as a powerful part of Anglican heritage, serving not as a “compromise for the sake of peace, but, as the collect for the feast of Richard Hooker reads, ‘a comprehension for the sake of truth’.”

Several submissions considered the Anglican approach to theological method[1] and reflected that past experience illustrated the value of open debate, with balanced appeal to Scripture, Reason and Tradition in order to resolve contentious issues.

“For Anglican Christians, the ongoing and mutually affecting exchange between theological texts and ethical practices transpiring in a community of faithful inquiry provides the only appropriate context for dealing with potentially divisive points of disagreement, including the diversity of opinion concerning human sexuality…Unfortunately, most of the objections to the actions taken by ECUSA and the Diocese of New Westminster treat decisions about sexuality as the exception to how Anglicans engage in theological reflection on other issues. These objections usually offer no explicit rationale for the uniqueness of sexuality in ecclesial deliberations and the reasons implied by these objections bear virtually no resemblance to what can be considered historically ‘Anglican’in Christian theology.”

In many of these later submissions, dissenting groups and networks, and bishops offering their ministry beyond their own jurisdictions, came in for particular criticism, eg

“If there is ‘chaos within ECUSA’, it is confined to those relatively small areas influenced by ‘orthodox’leaders such as Bishop Duncan. The vast majority of Episcopalians are living with the decisions made by the 2003 General Convention, whether they agree with those decisions or not."

Such comments were off-set to a degree by submissions from those who understood breakaway groups to be up-holders and protectors of orthodoxy:

“I am looking forward to becoming part of an Orthodox Anglican Parish if the ECUSA does not repent of its sins and go back to orthodox beliefs. I simply cannot support a denomination that has been seduced by the devil.”

Disaffection continued to emerge as a theme, if not in volume of submissions then in strength of appeal:

“We are not members of any special-interest groups within the church…But we do approach a point of decision that relies upon your Commission to clarify to us and to all that there is a place in the Anglican Communion for the theologically orthodox Anglicans in North America.”

“We ask the Commission to avoid caricaturing both sides by their worst expressions…but instead deal with them in their most consistent and authentic forms. This will inevitably mean that the traditionalist case is described as the overwhelmingly majority voice of Anglicanism, past and present…”

The testimony of one correspondent provided a glimpse into the broader context of human experience within which the current controversy is only a part:

“Last October, my wife, our daughters who were 5 and 12 at the time, and I had our world violently and perhaps permanently wrenched from us by the suicide of my wife’s 44 year-old sister, a death that came 15 months after the suicide of her 17 year-old daughter. So on November 2nd of last year when Gene Robinson was invested as a bishop in the Episcopal Church, I gave perhaps a passing thought to what was happening in the Diocese of New Hampshire, but only a passing thought, as I tried to help my wife cope with her unspeakable grief, and as I watched our beautiful daughters caught up in a senseless devastation they could not possibly understand. And while I still fundamentally believe that what was done in New Hampshire that November day is diametrically opposed to the teaching of Scripture, I can also tell you this much – if Bishop Robinson came to my home today to offer any sincerely felt comfort and solace to my family and me, if he could bring ‘the peace of God which passeth all understanding’ to my wife and children, I would not care a whit about his current sexual orientation, motives or politics…[What counts] is this simple directive, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”That is what matters.”

1. What are (a) the legal and (b) the theological implications flowing from ECUSA’s decision to appoint a priest in a committed same sex relationship as one of its bishops? (See LC 1998 Res. I.10)

(a) the legal

The activities of the ‘American Anglican Council’ (AAC) and the Network are more hazardous to unity than the recent actions of ECUSA’s General Convention (and of New Westminster) since they threaten both governance and the broad core of Anglican faith. 5 submissions

The minority voices within ECUSA who are calling upon other churches in the Communion to interfere with, and take issue with, the order of ECUSA's democratic polity are denying its basic constitution. 4 submissions

Congregations affiliating to such as the Anglican Communion Network/leaving the diocese should be able to stay in its buildings. 3 submissions

Given its voting structure (no deputation can cast an affirmative vote with less than 75 per cent of the approval of each order with the deputation), it is clear that votes taken at General Convention with respect to the Bishop-Coadjutor of New Hampshire represented an overwhelming majority of the Episcopal Church. 2 submissions

ECUSA has not taken any legal action to remove itself in any way from full communionwith the rest of the Anglican Communion. 2 submissions

Bishops who presume to exercise jurisdiction in another diocese or Church do more violence to catholic order than the decision of an autonomous Church to address a pastoral issue within its own body. 1 submission

A narrow, insular perspective, sanctimonious posturing and an implicit condemnation of those opposed marked the process of the ordination of the Bishop of New Hampshire. 1 submission

(b) the theological

The theological (and social) argument that homosexual activity is sinful is insecure and should be further explored. 11 submissions

“In the scholarly community today, there is no longer a consensus (whatever Lambeth 1998 said) that all homosexual relationships are contrary to Scripture. Too many good, wise and learned Anglicans have come to re-evaluate the church’s traditional teaching on homosexuality to pretend that the 1998 Lambeth Resolution should be given the weight of law, and that anyone who opposed it…should no longer be part of the Communion.”

“We submit that the current debate on human sexuality is part of the work of the Holy Spirit as he leads us further into the truth about our own human nature. In the light of the Holy Spirit’s work, the first Christians acknowledged the limits of their own vision, redefined their understanding of scripture and welcomed Gentiles into the body of Christ…We believe this is analogous to the present situation.”

The Bible is clear on the sinfulness of homosexual activity. 10 submissions

“The matter of justifiable Scriptural interpretation is especially critical at this point, because, as the recent report Some Issues in Human Sexuality from the English House of Bishops notes, and notwithstanding the few caveats the Report itself lists, ‘the consensus of biblical scholarship still points us in the direction of the traditional reading of the biblical material’.”

A balanced and integrated appeal to Scripture, Reason and Tradition is needed in order to resolve contentious issues. 5 submissions

There is a need to widen the sexuality debate: attitudes and practices of sexuality (heterosexual or homosexual) as purely consumerist or recreational are becoming more prevalent in some cultures. 3 submissions

The decisions in ECUSA and New Westminster do not threaten core doctrines. 1 submission

2. What are (a) the legal and (b) the theological implications of the decision of the diocese of New Westminster to authorise services for use in connection with same sex unions?

(a) legal

Choices made by the people of the Diocese of New Westminster through their own duly considered canonical process should be respected and honoured. 1 submission

(b) theological

If the ABC corrects the error, there will be no theological implications. If he hesitates, it will be the end of the Anglican Communion. 1 submission

When relationships, and the communities that support them, are grounded in Christ’s love and compassion, both marriage and same-sex unions can “bear good fruit” in witness to love. Both should be appropriately celebrated and recognised by and within their Christian communities. 1 submission

“In my [homosexual] friend’s case, just considering the possibility of entering into a blessed, permanent, committed, monogamous relationship has transformed the way he relates to possible partners.”

3. What are the canonical understandings of (a) communion, (b) impaired communion and (c) broken communion? (What is autonomy and how is it related to communion?)

(a)communion

Diversity and inclusivity are defining characteristics of the Anglican Communion. 12 submissions

“An Anglican approach…acknowledges the grace of communion by which we are made into the Body of Christ and, at the very same time, the differences of opinion in knowing the mind of Christ with clarity, which in no way obviates the grace of being in communion with each other, which comes only from God.”

“The Communion is bound by mutual tolerance, respect and support and has long allowed local variations in practical and liturgical matters which do not affect core doctrines but strengthen effectual witness in each society and culture where it is present.”

In spite of deep divisions in our understanding of biblical authority and the role of the church concerning social issues, Anglicans have been, and are, held together by koinonia and our sharing in the Eucharist. 6 submissions

“It is God who makes and protects sacraments, with even the best of us little more than damaged vessels for their delivery… Through celebration of the Eucharist, we separate ourselves from the world for a time to come into God’s presence. We hear the witness of our ancestors and apply it to the present moment. We pray for our needs and shortcomings, and we repent of our sins. We are forgiven, and we are at peace. We walk again amidst God’s mighty acts, and we participate in his last supper as his brothers and sisters. In receiving his body and blood, we are in communion – that is, in unity with God and one another. Finally, we are sent into the world to serve God utilising our particular gifts. In the end, there is unity whether we acknowledge it or not.”

“The theology and sociality of Anglicanism are intrinsically connected with a polity whose purpose is to provide the conditions for people to move toward each other, and toward all people, in moving to the kingdom of God. By episcopal and democratic means, unity is achieved not by superior authorities acting for people in predefined ways, but by people mobilised through the service of those who continuously assist them to move toward each other – and to all people in the world – to bring unity in the kingdom of God.”

Without critique from people of other cultures who share Anglican basics, we are abandoned to a culture-bound gospel. 1 submission

The Anglican Communion should understand itself as a family, kept together by bonds of affection rather than a defined ‘essence’of belief. 1 submission

(b) impaired communion

We have communion or we do not. To pretend that there is some sort of ‘impaired’ state confuses the issue. 1 submission

(c) broken communion

Broken communion runs counter to Paul’s vision of the Body of Christ. 3 submissions

Those churches that have broken or suspended communion with ECUSA are simply insisting on the maintenance of biblical standards. 1 submission

4. What is autonomy and how is it related to communion?

Each member Church in the Anglican Communion is an autonomous body in terms of its own governance but we are joined in bonds of affection and in our common unity with the See of Canterbury. 3 submissions

“If we are a Communion of Churches, and not one Church structure, ie, the difference between the Anglican and Roman understandings of catholic order, then there must be a mutual respect, not only of the order of each Church set up for its own functioning, but for the ability of each Bishop to exercise his/her jurisdiction as Ordinary of a geographical Diocese without his/her brother or sister Bishops intervening in that jurisdiction.”

The legal autonomy of each province should remain inviolable. 2 submissions

Autonomy is the antithesis of communion. 1 submission

Once a group of autonomous bodies decide to be in communion with each other, they must be prepared to renegotiate the terms and understanding of communion. 1 submission

“Autonomy is independence and communion is interdependence and the relationship between the two is dynamic and ever-changing; never fixed and stationary. It is this salient nature of the relationship that requires constant attention and renegotiation.”

5. How (do and) may provinces relate to one another in situations where the ecclesiastical authorities of one province feel unable to maintain the fullness of communion with another part of the Anglican Communion?

Full support should be given to the aim of the Lambeth Commission on Communion to find new ways forward without dividing the Anglican Communion. 6 submissions

Provinces are not required, in the case of serious theological error, to maintain and relate to each other. (“Someone must be true to God’s word”; “We must follow the Book”) 2 submissions

Unity should not be at the expense of LGBTQ persons. 2 submissions

“I hope and pray that this Commission can find ways for our Communion to continue together without resorting to models of unity that harmonize our cacophony through a mere loss or removal of voices.”

Those provinces most disturbed should simply remain out of communion with ECUSA and New Westminster while permitting individuals from dissenting dioceses to receive the Sacrament in their churches. 1 submission

African Primates have been courted and directed by the American conservative bodies but ultimately cannot deliver control of the Episcopal Church. 1 submission

ECUSA must be declared no longer Anglican (with the hope of repentance and restoration). 1 submission

6. What practical solutions might there be to maintain the highest degree of communion that may be possible, in the circumstances resulting from these two decisions, within the individual churches involved? (eg [alternative] episcopal oversight when full communion is threatened)

Tensions arising from differing views should be resolved in the Anglican/Episcopal tradition by prayerful and temperate discourse, with any agreed results being effectuated pursuant to the Constitutions and Canons of that church, or of the diocese involved. 5 submissions

AEO would contradict the core values of the Communion. It would exacerbate the impaired communion it is meant to redress (and fall short of the trinitarian theological insights that have shaped Anglican traditions). 3 submissions

“…institutionalizing disagreement – which is effectively what alternative episcopal oversight would accomplish –circumscribes the scope of Christian hope by insisting that there is nothing left to learn from sharing in Eucharistic communion with those with whom we disagree.”

“Allowing bishops from one geographical Province to oversee congregations in another geographical Province, in effect, results in a congregational system of only loosely-linked churches with virtually no oversight.”

“The AAC’s and Network’s insistence that a parish be able to redirect its financial support to the diocese providing oversight effectively transfers the parish out of its own diocese. The result here will be to pack the diocese with distant parishes unable to participate in diocesan life, but able to distort diocesan votes. The segregation by belief that AEO fosters would also halt interactions between parishes within a diocese that do not agree on everything, but nonetheless share in ministry. These interactions are very effective in breaking down misunderstanding and fear, and in maintaining the via media we cherish.”

AEO arrangements should be made both ways, ie, available to non-dissenting parishes in Network dioceses, and to Network parishes in non-dissenting dioceses. 2 submissions

The ABC should renounce the primates and others involved in these two decisions as heretics. 2 submissions

“If the church will not accept the truth, then remaining in communion is a moot point (even Satan offered Christ, as he tempted him, a “communion” – He could have been king of the world, instead of our saviour).”

Congregations should be able to choose to belong to another church entity, in communion with Canterbury. 1 submission

The AAC is a well-funded special-interest group representing a small minority of American Episcopalians. 1 submission

There are many parishes within the eight dioceses that have joined the Network, and many individuals with the Network parishes, who do not agree with its theological and political positions. 1 submission

There is a significant majority in the Church who can reason together and find new ways forward; they should not be undermined by a dissatisfied minority. 1 submission

The Bishop of New Jersey, USA, is implementing DEPO in a truly Christian and pastoral way. It should be a model for use in the American Church. 1 submission

There may be a limited role for Lambeth to facilitate AEO within the province, with the consent of that province. 1 submission

7. What practical solutions might there be to maintain the highest degree of communion that may be possible, in the circumstances resulting from these two decisions, as between the churches of the Anglican Communion? (eg [alternative] episcopal oversight when full communion is threatened)

All parties should step back from the use of combative language, threats and ultimatums in order to sit at table with one another. 3 submissions

Finding the highest degree of communion might begin with an affirmation of trust: that everyone in this moment of controversy believes in and loves Jesus and is seeking to serve him as their hearts, minds and spirits direct. 2 submissions

Bishops and archbishops should meet, meet soon, and exercise radical hospitality towards one another. 2 submissions

“When asked what holds the Anglican Communion together, South African Archbishop Emritus Desmond Tutu answered that ‘We meet’.”

A ‘core covenant’ of some sort would facilitate authoritarian control over the beliefs, dogmas and practices of the Communion and would be detrimental to filial bonds and the via media. 2 submissions

“…proposals dealing with authority and discipline, especially the wish for a new centralized authority for the Anglican Communion …confirm observations about power and authority in social and political – and ecclesial – institutions. When there is general agreement about what is to be done by whom (whether in formal law or informal consensus), authority structures are seldom invoked and power need only rarely be exercised to compel someone to behave in a particular way. Conversely, when there is little agreement, there is a tendency to turn to legal remedies and force… Such a move to consolidate institutional power in the face of instability is common outside the church as well as inside. Liberation movements of all sorts have long recognized that power does not give itself away; but perhaps this could be different for followers of Jesus Christ. I invite the Commission to consider this factor in determining how we are to strengthen our ‘bonds of affection’without strangling one another.”

The means to full reconciliation is neither dialogue nor creative tension but reversible expulsion, consistent with Paul’s expressed goal of love, 2 Cor 2:8. 1 submission

For the sake of maintaining unity, different parts of the Anglican Communion should be allowed to have their own standards of acceptability for clergy ministering within their particular jurisdictions. 1 submission

The Lambeth Conference could establish a statement of faith and practice as a standard to determine which bishops are, or are not part of the Anglican Communion. Where there is no signature or inconsistent conformity, there will be no communion and AEO should then be recognised by the Conference, the See of Canterbury and all the instruments and agencies of the Anglican Communion. 1 submission

Then a national church breaks with the Anglican Communion on a basic issue, it must lose its membership in that communion. 1 submission

Historically, and in reality, the canonical limit of church authority is at the national level. However, the provinces might choose to set aside the loose and informal Instruments of Unity and authorise the creation of a synodical body, with representatives from each province. 1 submission

In time, homosexual African clergy may seek AEO from North America. 1 submission

8. Under (a) what circumstances, (b) what conditions, and (c) by what means, might it be appropriate for the Archbishop of Canterbury to exercise an extraordinary ministry of pastoral oversight, support and reconciliation with regard to the internal affairs of a province to maintain communion between Canterbury and that province? (see LC 1998, Res. IV.13)

The ACiNW submitted a detailed ‘case for alternative episcopal oversight: an overview of the crisis in the diocese of New Westminster and its impact on the worldwide Anglican Communion’, which has not been summarised here. See S-3-167.

The planting of churches or activities across diocesan or provincial borders by bishops without the permission of the local bishop and the ABC should draw the intervention of the ABC. 3 submissions

Where a bishop or archbishop of a province does not act, then the ABC must act. 2 submissions

The strongest possible sanctions should be imposed against ECUSA and support given to the Network of Anglican dioceses and parishes. 2 submissions

The ABC should only intervene in extreme circumstances, such as the breakdown of administration or apostasy, having first sought consensus for his actions among the primates. 1 submission

The ABC should have the right to intervene when requested so to do by a substantial and representative body (eg, the Network) – with moral authority but with no power to bring sanctions to bear. 1 submission

The ABC could provide extraordinary pastoral oversight, delegated to an alternative bishop, priest or deacon, thus extending accessible pastoral care to those with a bona fide objection of conscience to their local hierarchy. 1 submission

The Anglican orders providing alternative pastoral care could have an organisational structure like that of the Jesuits (ie, directly under the supervision of the ABC rather than local bishops), thus centring unity on Canterbury. 1 submission

Dissenters within a province should be directed by the ABC to dissent within the canonical structures of the province. 1 submission

There should be provision of sanctioned oversight for the marginalised orthodox and it is necessary that such oversight should be provided without the primates feeling the necessity of obtaining the permission of the province or diocese in question. This action is legitimate precisely because the abuse of power that has led to this crisis is illegitimate. 1 submission

9. Under (a) what circumstances, (b) what conditions, and (c) by what means, might it be appropriate for the Archbishop of Canterbury to exercise an extraordinary ministry of pastoral oversight, support and reconciliation with regard to the internal affairs of a province to maintain communion between that province and the rest of the Anglican Communion? (see LC Res. IV.13)

It would be an error to apply any sanctions or realignment in response to recent actions in ECUSA and the Anglican Church in Canada. 3 submissions

The provinces involved in the two decisions must be sanctioned in order to defend the faith. 1 submission.

As ‘first among equals’, the ABC does not have the legal authority to establish oversight over the various provinces, yet his words and actions carry great weight; he should constantly call us to honesty, transparency and to break bread together.         1 submission

There is currently no structure for adjudication of this sort of dispute. A process for formulating an international polity, framed as a discussion about unity, could be a forum for lively discussion among the provinces. (Richard Hooker’s Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity would serve as a foundation for such a discussion.) 1 submission

“…a reactive single-issue polity decision will not move us to the larger discussion we must have.”

Other comments

Concerning mission:

The inability to find peaceful and reconciling tools to help live with disagreements will undermine our collective ability to fight global injustices, in particular poverty, HIV/AIDS and violence. 1 submission

It seems unlikely that mission will be damaged by impaired communion. Ordinary Christians will simply continue their work for the Kingdom. 1 submission

Three submissions were received from members of the medical profession offering their particular considerations concerning homosexuality. See S-3-128, S-3-153 and S-3-155.

Submissions from individuals to the Lambeth Commission on Communion, from June  to September 2004

Document No. Document
S-3-106 Central Trustees of the world-wide Mothers’ Union
S-3-107 Anna Thomas-Betts, UK, Member of General Synod, C of E
S-3-108 Gerard K Hannon, New York
S-3-109  
S-3-110 Julia Christian, Associate Rector, California, USA
S-3-111 Rick Matters, San Joaquin, USA
S-3-112 Donna Bott, Moderator, Episcopal Voices of Central Florida
S-3-113 The Very Revd James E Carroll, San Diego, USA
S-3-114 The Revd Michael B Russell, San Diego, USA
S-3-115 Via Media Dallas, USA (Ron Whitehead, Convenor)
S-3-116 Jack Gerlach, Diocese of Texas, USA
S-3-117 Christopher I Wilkins, Facilitator, Via Media USA Steering Committee
S-3-118 C West Jacocks IV, Sumter, USA
S-3-119 Douglas A Kerr and Carla C Kerr, Dallas, USA (2)
S-3-120 Kenneth Murray, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand; Martin Murray, North Eastern University, Shenyang, People’s Republic of China
S-3-121 Judy Wright Mathews, Diocese of Florida, USA
S-3-122 Eric Hyom, Roman Catholic, UK (2)
S-3-123 Nigel Renton, Berkeley, California, USA
S-3-124 Via Media USA (Christopher I Wilkins)
S-3-125 Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh, USA (Lionel Deimel, President, et al)
S-3-126 Mrs Mary J Wright, Metro Area Multi-Church Prayer Group, Alexandria, VA, USA
S-3-127 Modern Churchpeople’s Union, UK
S-3-128 Barbara Nicol, MD, FACOG
S-3-129 Christopher Evans, Berkeley, California, USA
S-3-130 Antoine Johnson, Colorado Springs, CO, USA
S-3-131 Jay Emerson Johnson, Visiting Professor of Theology, Pacific School of Religion, California, USA
S-3-132 The Revd Arthur Lee, Florida, USA
S-3-133 Gavin White
S-3-134 George Danz, Suffolk, VA, USA
S-3-135 Ian Montgomery, Rector, Menasha, WI, USA
S-3-136 John Thorp, Professor in the Dept of Philosophy, University of Western Ontario, Canada
S-3-137 The Very Rev Thomas B Woodward, Rector, Salinas, CA, USA
S-3-138 Tim McMichael, Annandale, VA, USA
S-3-139 Douglas Starr, DMA, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
S-3-140 Jane Little, Diocese of Pittsburgh, USA
S-3-141 Tobias S Haller, BSG, Vicar, Bronx, NY, USA (2)
S-3-142 The Revd Chris Todd, Big Pine Key, Florida, USA
S-3-143 The Rev Earle Fox, Emmaus Ministries, Alexandria, VA, USA
S-3-144 Executive Committee of the Anglican Gathering of Ottawa, Canada (Chair, Frank Johnson)
S-3-145 The Executive of Inclusive Church .net (The Revd Richard Thomas)
S-3-146 Brian D Lott, Haywards Heath, UK
S-3-147 Canon Dr John S Nurser, Sudbury, Suffolk, UK
S-3-148 Cecil L Powers, Jr, Pace, Florida, USA
S-3-149 The Revd John Banks, Nottingham, UK
S-3-150 The Ven D Bruce Bryant-Scott, Diocesan Executive Officer, Anglican Synod of the Diocese of British Columbia
S-3-151 Loren Williams, Diocese of Western North Carolina, USA
S-3-152 Submission commissioned by the Bishop of New York and prepared by a committee of priests and professors at General Theological Seminary NY, USA
S-3-153 Articles from the British Medical Journal forwarded by Dr John Pike
S-3-154 Fort Worth Via Media (Marvin Long, President)
S-3-155 Doris Caitlin Odlozinski, Canada
S-3-156 Bishop J Jon Bruno & Canon Mark R Kowalewski, Los Angeles
S-3-157 Peter T Manzo, Rector, New Jersey, USA
S-3-158 Jon M Spangler, San Francisco, USA
S-3-159 Albany Via Media (John Sorensen)
S-3-160 Dr Virginia Hyde, Washington State University, USA
S-3-161 Church of England Evangelical Council
S-3-162 Liz Zivanov, Hawaii, USA
S-3-163 David W Powell, Washington, DC, USA
S-3-164 Dawn McDonald et al, Canada
S-3-165 Dr Pamela W Darling, Philadelphia, USA
S-3-166 Concerned Episcopalians of St Lawrence Deanery, USA (A Grimmke)
S-3-167 ‘A Case for Alternative Episcopal Oversight’ submitted by ACiNW
S-3-168 Fernanda Harrington, New Hampshire, USA
S-3-169 Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh (Lionel Deimel), USA
S-3-170 Britt Thompson, Texas, USA
S-3-171  
S-3-172 Mary Reath, Princeton, USA
S-3-173 John Harrington, New Hampshire, USA
S-3-174 Professor Daniel W Hardy
S-3-175  
   

1S-3-131 Jay Emerson Johnson, S-3-150 D Bruce Bryant-Scott and S-3-171 a submission commissioned by the Bishop of New York and prepared by a committee of priests and professors at the General Theological Seminary NY, USA,  offered extensive reflection on the method and tasks of theology which cannot be summarised adequately in this résumé. These three submissions have been made available to members of the Lambeth Commission, as have all submissions received from individuals and groups.