It seems that Henry Orombi has resigned from the Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion, apparently on the basis that there is no Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion. The centralisation by this Standing Committee, to overlook the Covenant, before it is even accepted, is challenged by the likes of Orombi on the basis of instead having centralisation by the Primates. His argument is that the 1998 Lambeth Conference resolved that the Primates can meet in between bishops' meetings with an enhanced responsibility to offer guidance. He (still) wants Rowan Williams to convene a meeting of Primates under its own agenda.
To do what? To offer guidance or try to create a situation of governance? Who says that authority exists to set these institutions up at all? Anyway, if the situation is so desperate, why don't these Primates convene the meeting themselves? He wants the Archbishop of Canterbury to exclude The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada from the meeting, but probably he has no grounds for excluding them even if he were to call such a meeting. And one wonders what did happen to GAFCON and all that, which seems so ineffective itself.
However, see a comment that, just like Mouneer Anis, he will still be around, that raises the question: when is a resignation not actually a resignation? Has he actually gone?
No. Alison Barfoot has apologised. It seems that his ghost writer had over-spooked his letter.
A view from the gallery - http://changingattitude.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/GS-A-View-From-the-Gallery-75x42.jpg 75w" sizes="(max-width: 299px) 100vw, 299px" /> When I was a ...