The "new ecumenism" espoused by the Pope, while an affront to many Anglicans, is being practiced by... you guessed it, the Anglicans.
Per Ruth Gledhill the Methodist Church has pulled a TAC with their organizational President and Vice President saying,
'Methodists approach the Covenant with the Church of England in the spirituality of that Covenant prayer. So when we say to God, "let me have all things let me have nothing," we say it by extension to our partners in the Church of England as well. We are prepared to go out of existence not because we are declining or failing in mission, but for the sake of mission. In other words we are prepared to be changed and even to cease having a separate existence as a Church if that will serve the needs of the Kingdom.'
While Ruth looks at this rather cheekily, we're on the same page about this: how is this any different than Hepworth Primate of the TAC making overtures to the Holy See, leading up to the edict of the Apostolic Constitution? She points out some concerns both communions see as potential stumbling points.
Some Methodists are not sure about whether they want bishops or not, and some Anglicans, from the ranks of those who oppose women bishops, are not sure about whether they want Methodists. The reasons for both oppositions are the same: questions around orders and the Apostolic succession. But the Methodists might be prepared to accept bishops if women are allowed to join their ranks in the Church of England, as Methodism is fully inclusive of women in all leadership positions.
The parallels between these realignments is pretty amazing. It's not just the hurdles that both groups have to overcome it's also a matter of history and direction.
For Anglicans and Catholics there's ARCIC, for the Anglicans and Methodists, in Great Britain it is their covenant. For both it's a matter of realizing that at some point there's nothing more to talk about. For ARCIC it was a matter of lots of good work and then a break down because of the controversial stances the Anglicans have taken ecclisiologically.
In regards to the covenant, it is interesting to note the formal agreement to seek unity was signed in 2003, the same year that ARCIC talks were suspended. That being noted, the covenant seemed to state what was already known, that the two bodies were moving closer theologically and in mission (social justice).
It's also like watching a great game of Chess, or Risk as those who are deemed theologically 'conservative' amass on one side of the board and the liberals on the other, all in the name of 'Christian Unity.' The obvious question is, Unity to what end?
To note, on this side of the Atlantic, I don't believe the United Methodist Church and Episcopal Church have any plans to merge.
