Chair of Section One Archbishop of Cape Town Primate of Southern Africa

Canterbury

It is a great joy for me to present the work of Section One to this Lambeth Conference. In the limited time and resources available at our disposal we have done our best to be faithful to God, that through us He may take the process of our work to wherever He intends to use and bless it. In our work together we have, above all, set ourselves to listen to God, and also to listen to one another.

The responsible task given to us had to do with some of the most significant issues that will be before the Communion for the next 10 years. This is a momentous period and these are crucial issues for this Lambeth Conference to give direction and guidance to God's people as they confront each issue in their own particular context. May God add His blessing to our Plenary deliberations today.

What does it mean to be Called to Full Humanity? Who calls? What is 'full humanity'?

At the outset, we want to affirm that God Who created us in His image and according to His likeness, Who through grace and mercy offers us new life in Jesus Christ, and Who continues to dwell in and among us through the Holy Spirit - is the God Who calls every one of us. God's call is profoundly loving. It holds before us the image of who we truly are, by the One Who knows our frailties, Who affirms our differences and Who woos us into true and authentic existence. Full humanity is nothing less and nothing more than God's promise of the fullness of our being in His image. God's call is also profoundly just. All are precious, all have inviolate dignity, all reflect His image. No one is outside God's saving concern. God has no favourites, for the promise of full humanity is for every human being. This affirms our equality before God in our differences.

Thus we are all called to full humanity. Our response to God's call is a response made in faith, undergirded by our confidence and trust in God's promises. Our response has serious moral and ethical implications for how we live our lives. How we make moral choices in the light of our journey to full humanity, lies at the heart of the work of Section One.

Before proceeding to the content of this section, I want to pay tribute to the excellent and committed work of all members of this Section, including the consultants and the editors. Our work was intensive and arduous, it was often not easy as we shared passionately held beliefs and discovered our differences. But we found ourselves experiencing difference in a spirit of Christian fellowship, recognising our common vocation under God to be servants of the Gospel.

The Anglican via media has indeed been a rocky road for some in our section. Our journey took us across the continents of the world to hear horrific and moving stories about the reality of debt servicing and human rights. We struggled with what it means to be fully human in relation to modern technology, sexuality and the environment and even to debate what it means to be fully human at the point of dying.

The Section has had to wrestle with the problem of difference and otherness. The problem of difference lies at the heart of the human inability to live together in justice, freedom and peace. In her excellent theological presentation that commenced our work together, Professor Denise Ackermann reminded us of this forcefully. Of course, in the sexuality section they didn't need much reminding most of the time.

At times our particularities have tempted us to be prescriptive. Also we soon discovered that our differences are not simply geographically or culturally determined. Our differences are deeply influenced by our traditions, Yes, but also by the ways in which we interpret the Scriptures, understand Anglicanism, by our world views, and by our fears and our hopes.

We South Africans know about difference. We have both been branded by it as well as learning to celebrate it. The apartheid regime sanctified differences, indeed the theory of apartheid was based on a particular interpretation of some Biblical texts, so the Bible was used to support a particular political ideology. But for most of us South Africans, the apartheid experience was one of poverty, injustice and alienation. Now we are trying to forge bonds across our differences and we thank God for much grace in this regard.

Professor Ackermann suggested that the notion of mutuality in relationship, that is the reciprocal interdependence of equals should be the foundation on which we base our efforts to achieve our full humanity in true human community. The search for and practice of an ethic of relationship in difference and otherness must be pursued if we are to gain that elusive full humanity we long for. Living respectfully, lovingly and creatively across our differences, in communion with each other must always remain foundational to our work, our life, our fellowship in Christian community. This spells tolerance, forbearance, kindness, generosity, love and justice.

Our Section set out to explore a number of seemingly disparate themes, each of them contentious and large enough to merit a section of their own. Yet we sought to link them to a framework which we as Anglicans understand as providing moral, ethical, and theological guidelines for our actions as people seeking full humanity in Christ.

To order our deliberations we thought it important to devise a four stage method to be followed by each of the themes. We began with stories describing our situations. Then immediately, these stories, their pain, hopes and challenges raised questions of faith and set the scene for the next stage. Here we sought to apply, in accordance with the Virginia Report the triad of Scripture, tradition and reason. Thereafter, in stage three we proceeded to theological reflection, in the belief that the gospel speaks into our situations. Lastly, we discussed the practical steps which are needed to give substance to our newly gained insights. These are spelt out in our resolutions.

To return to the themes:

International debt was considered by all the pre-Lambeth regional meetings to be important. For most it was at the top of the agenda. The eyes of the conference and of the Communion worldwide have been upon us as we debated this issue. In thinking about international debt and economic justice we have held three principles in mind:

1. Debt relief must be achieved in a way that will benefit the poor;
2. We want to address creditor and debtor nations alike so that all bishops can use the resolution in their home situations; and
3. We want to avoid making moral pronouncements that cost us nothing as a Church: So we have addressed ourselves as provinces and as a Communion.

It is an understatement to say that the sub-section on sexuality has been far from straightforward. Here our different cultures, theologies and understandings and interpretations of Biblical texts nearly broke any chance of coming to some sort of agreement on the question of homosexuality. This section of the report was hammered out on an anvil of pain. Nevertheless there was much careful listening within this sub-section. It represents where the Communion is. This part of our report is not only about homosexuality. There is much of great value in what it says about all sexual relationships.

In the end the human sexuality section agreed unanimously with a report which spoke of the differing viewpoints on this issue within the Communion. Their resolution reflects the hard work of this section where people with strongly opposing viewpoints have engaged with one another. I therefore urge you to support their resolution and acknowledge the diversity of practices within our Communion.

Those in the environment sub-section remind us that by the time environmental issues get to the top of the Lambeth agenda it will be too late. "I can't help but be astonished at the sheer lack of urgency among church leaders today, ours is a world crying out for leadership, for some kind of spiritual guidance." These are the words of Jonathan Porritt in his book Seeing Green. Environmental concerns are central to our Christian vocation. "Full Humanity" is dependent upon our capacity to relate to the whole created order.

If the church fails to take up environmental questions in earnest then it will fail our children and our children's children. Environmental issues and international debt place a future burden on our society unless they are addressed now. Our generation is mortgaging our children's future and the future of our planet.

The human rights sub-section has been representative of the Anglican Communion throughout the world and has shared stories about the violation of human rights in different countries. This is reflected in our report. The report speaks of the widening gap between rich and poor; the violation of women and children; war, guns and landmines; racial and caste discrimination; fundamentalism and nationalism; refugees asylum seekers and uprooted and displaced people; indigenous people; and the effects of the global economy. In our theological reflection we have indicated a framework for considering our theme with attention to context, practical application, and the nature and role of the Church (Anglican Communion) in the world.

And what of technology? We know that unprecedented technological changes will take place in our world in the next decade. For unimaginable technological changes have taken place since we met ten years ago. Are you on E-mail? Does your child have to programme your computer for you? Is your crozier ready to shepherd Dolly the sheep that was cloned in an Edinburgh laboratory? How do we keep abreast of all this?

Technology is power which brings great promise for a better life and a better world. But this power can also corrupt and destroy God's creatures and God's creation. Our call is to use this power appropriately and reverently, reminding ourselves that we are at all times accountable to God. This section calls for the establishment of a commission through the ACC to keep track of technological developments and to reflect on them theologically and ethically.

And if all that I have said is not enough - the section had also to consider euthanasia. The euthanasia group has tried to do three things:

1. Clarify people's understanding of the term in the light of widespread public confusion;
2. Define the term more precisely so as to distinguish what is appropriate medical practice and palliative care, and what involves the act of taking of human life; and
3. Reject calls for the legalisation of euthanasia as being against Christian conscience which upholds the sacredness of life as a gift from God.

So I'm sure you will agree with me that Section One has not been idle. But our work is only a step on a long road. The new millennium is upon us. If the Churches cannot model what change, justice and peace means in our different communities, the world will be a poorer place. It is our responsibility to accept the challenge of difference and otherness, to wrestle with it and with God's grace to celebrate our diversity, respectfully. Then we shall reflect God's image and claim our authentic humanity.