In their bid to export what South Carolina Bishop Mark Lawrence labeled “the gospel of indiscriminate inclusivity,” revisionist forces in the Episcopal Church have allies they can call upon in the Anglican Communion, and not just the usual suspects in Canada, Scotland or New Zealand. When seeking validation for their actions, Episcopal leaders have called upon the churches of Mexico, Brazil, and frequently, Southern Africa. At about 2 million members, the province of Southern Africa is significantly larger than either Anglican population in Mexico (25,000) or Brazil (83,000) and is more equivalent to other mid-sized African provinces such as Rwanda (1.27 million) and Kenya (2.5 million).
None of these provinces has provoked the Anglican Communion as their American and Canadian counterparts have, with the election of openly partnered homosexual bishops. But in the Episcopal Church’s evangelistic fervor to spread heterodox teaching to the rest of the Anglican Communion, they are more than ready to play a supporting role.
Just like in the Episcopal Church, not everyone in these provinces is revisionist. Some bishops in Mexico and Southern Africa have either criticized TEC’s actions at General Convention, or expressed solidarity with the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA), the alternative province-in-formation recently launched by U.S. and Canadian traditionalists. Indeed, Brazil has experienced its own split, with the conservative northern diocese of Recife breaking away from that province and joining the neighboring Province of the Southern Cone.
But the majority of the provinces, and certainly their leadership, are onboard with the revisionist agenda. The Episcopal Church views them not merely as allies in holding off conservative detractors like the churches of Nigeria or Rwanda, but also as a beachhead for liberalizing other Global South provinces such as Tanzania and even Uganda.
All along, TEC has assumed that they have South Africa in their back pocket, and they’re probably right. But, if they attempt to subvert Uganda, they’ll have a war on their hands.
It is important to note that South Africa has had equal rights for the LGBT community since its first post-apartheid constitution in 1996 and a gender and orientation-neutral criminal code since 2008. So, saying that South Africa is in the TEC’s “back pocket” is a quite an oversimplification. Indeed, it shows, as do the actions of the Churchs of Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya, etc. that Africa is no longer a playground for colonialists NOR is it a socio-political monolith.
For those that are curious about where Episcopal money is flowing in the Global South, check out Trinity Wall Street’s grants through their “Church in the Global South” program.
http://www.trinitywallstreet.org/action/grants/approved
This is just one (very affluent) liberal congregation. I am not challenging the worthiness of the projects listed, simply noting the strong level of support they are receiving from TEC. For these churches to cut themselves off from TEC would result in a huge financial sacrifice: it’s a major incentive to remain silent when TEC misbehaves.