If you haven’t already, read it all. Of course, the primary question for Western Louisiana is the same as for all Dioceses still in the Episcopal Church who have worked to maintain fellowship and communion with all Anglican provinces within the Communion, is will we do what is necessary to be recognized by the Primates Council of the GAFCON movement. Will we adopt the Jerusalem statement? Will we separate spiritually from the Episcopal Church and not recognize the spiritual leadership of apostate bishops, including our own Presiding Bishop? What does it mean to say:
“We reject the authority of those churches and leaders who have denied the orthodox faith in word or deed. We pray for them and call on them to repent and return to the Lord.”
It seems to me, from the statement, that Network dioceses, being a part of the Common Cause Partnership, are recognized already. Western Louisiana never joined the Network. That very well could change because of its wider recognition. Moreover, if the Primate of Tanzania signs onto this thing and joins the Primatial Council, will he make a space for the Communion Partners?
Yet, these same questions persist for places like Central Florida, South Carolina, and other network Dioceses, that being how can one accept the GAFCON statement and yet remain in the Episcopal Church? Is that even possible? Considering that only Fort Worth and Pittburgh are poised to make a break for it, with San Joaquin already having done so, what are the other Network dioceses going to do? What, indeed, do they have to do to maintain fellowship with other GAFCON jurisdictions?
On the whole, this appears to be a statement that promises more of the same. Certain provinces do not recognize ECUSA or the Anglican Church of Canada as being in Communion with them. The statement says border crossings are okay, which is a post-hoc justification for what is already happening.
What would have been truly helpful in this statement would be a recognition that Dioceses are the basic unit of the church, and to base future interventions solely on whether or not the local bishop is recognized by GAFCON. That would have given everyone a clear path to follow and possible a move toward something different. Without it, the chaos will likely continue.
It will be an interesting Lambeth in light of this statement, however. I think Leander Harding is right in that the initiative in this situation has shifted. The fence sitters are being forced off the fence. Canterbury has flat run out of time in this crisis.