Archbishop Emeritus of Cape Town Desmond Tutu has appealed to Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams to invite all bishops to the 2008 Lambeth Conference, “even those irregularly consecrated or actively gay.”
The Nobel Peace Prize laureate’s plea came in a letter to the present Archbishop of Cape Town, Njongonkulu Ndungane, in which he also called on all Anglican bishops to be “more welcoming and inclusive of one another.”
“Our Communion has always been characterized by its comprehensiveness, its inclusiveness, its catholicity,” he said. “…we are really family, held together not so much by law as by bonds of affection. There is no family that is unanimous on every single subject.”
The Lambeth Conference, the once-a-decade gathering of Anglican Communion bishops, is due to be held July 16-August 4, 2008 at the University of Kent in Canterbury, England. About 880 invitations have been sent out to serving diocesan, suffragan and assisting bishops.
Desmond?
“Our Communion has always been characterized by its comprehensiveness, its inclusiveness, its catholicity,” he said. “…we are really family, held together not so much by law as by bonds of affection. There is no family that is unanimous on every single subject.”
That statement just about melted my brain. How, exactly, does one become a Bishop without knowing what “catholicity” means?
It’s striking how favorably the the calm and Christian voice of Desmond Tutu compares to the un-brotherly hypocrisy of other African bishops like Akinola.
It’s striking how favorably the the calm and Christian voice of Akinola compares to the un-brotherly hypocrisy of other African bishops like Tutu.
Oh, right, Desmond Tutu must be a bad guy too.
Apparently Bishop Tutu, like so many others, has trouble grasping the idea that many of us have no problem about unanimity on many subjects. It just the wholesale reinterpretation of scripture and the singularness of Jesus Christ are not some of them. If the groups cannot agree an the basic tennets of what it means to be Christian, then what is really the point in agreeing about the minor details?
I agree with Harry Edmon — thanks for saying that, Harry!
The only thing that is “striking” is that revisionists and reasserters disagree. Not surprising, but still “striking”.
Desmond needs to work on Darfur, I think. Get the comprehensiveness and concern spread a little closer to his home contintnent. Isn’t that the ECUSA/TEC line about interfering African bishops, at least among the liberals? I do respect him enormously, by the way. He just happens to be wrong about these issues. Even saints can err, as we see demonstrated historically and currently.
Wow – you all don’t like Bishop Tutu either???
I don’t think I could ever find myself in a position to criticize someone who has done so much to make the world a better place. So so so much to make the world a better place. When he speaks, regardless of the topic, I am always listening. He has experienced and endured things we should be thankful never to have to face. And, he did it all in the name of God – perhaps one of the most inspiring Christian witnesses of our time. I’m surprised to learn that not everyone feels that way – I guess I shouldn’t assume much of anything these days.
“How, exactly, does one become a Bishop without knowing what “catholicity†means?” (#2)
That statement just about melted my brain. How exactly does one criticize a bishop who so thoroughly embodies catholicity unless that one have such a myopic concept of catholicity as to not, himself, understand what catholicity means?
Hmmm …
Is Tutu just speaking for himself? Remember, TEC has just beefed up its media apparatus and with the recent meeting in Spain and the one going on in Hong Kong – all organized by the ACC – is this a sampling of what is to come?
One does wonder.
Remember friends, this is a chess match, not WWW Wrestling. It will be interesting to contrast and compare Tutu with the current Archbishop of South Africa as he tours the United States right now. If the progressives take the view of “Ya’al come” and invite not only Gene but Martyn, well, guess who probably won’t show? They are banking on it, these progressives. Pretty cynical, if true.
Canterbury looks great having listened to Desmond Tutu, one of the heroes of our generation (there’s no doubt about that, despite his theological views) and opened up the flood gates to everyone except despots (NO ONE wants them to come) and then the Communion will still break up, only TEC, the ABC, and Desmond Tutu win the day. “We had the party, where were you?”
So on one hand we have Peter Akinola writing his letter to the world outlining in detail how the Communion was broken by the unilateral actions of TEC, and on the other hand we have Desmond Tutu saying, what the hell – invite everybody! Any politician (or archbishop) in their right mind would say, “open the floodgates and come on down!”
Or would they?
If this were to happen, it would spell disaster for England. Yes, England. We wonder if Canterbury knows that too. They bishops of England who are orthodox (and who are the greatest numbers of lay Anglican now?), are too close to the Anglican center to not know the real story – to know that this is a ruse. Demond Tutu has forgotten all about them.
But the Global South has not.
And we trust, neither has the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Wouldn’t it be something if it is the English Bishops who have the final say? God bless you, Bishop Ridley!
bb
First of all BB, Akinola didn’t write the letter (or at least most of it); Minns did with a little help from some others. At least Bishop Tutu has enough integrity to speak for himself.
And second, you’re from Virginia, you should know this: it’s spelled y’all.
I think I will listen to Bishop Tutu.
Babyblue, Are you sure that Akinola wrote that letter? The church times thinks otherwise:
http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/content.asp?id=43511
12, what a racist comment.
Br. Michael,
How is what Makersmarc said racist? I see no mention of anything except a suggestion that someone had someone else write his letter as reported in the CHurch times. That doesn’t make one a racist, rather a realist, skeptic, etc.
racist::1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
I will be proud to follow Bishop Akinola over Bishop Tutu any day. The AC is spliting and it will be nasty, more nasty that I think I really realized. 13, makes the point.
15, give me a break. That’s the only reason this came up.
I’ve never been a fan of Tutu. Yes, American and European liberals love to fawn all over him for his pc attitudes and certainly he has been here in Seattle to prop up his failing gay pal the Dean of St. Mark’s Cathedral. But what has happened to South Africa since his “success” is nothing short of appalling: one of the highest , if not the highest, AIDS rates in the world, civil and economic unrest everywhere, danger and death around every corner in it’s big cities, hijackings and kidnappings, business people and tourists being warned not to leave their hotels with out armed guards, tourists and business people being told to take taxis on a four block trip to a restaurant or concert hall or theatre because it is too dangerous to walk, young white people (who’s ancestors lived in South Africa for centuries and decades if not generations before black people ever moved there) fleeing the land because they have no future in a land that discriminates against them. Yeah, Tutu and his cohort Mandela turned South Africa in to a real paradise…Eden like even. Most of the cretins who think this is all so wonderful and progressive ought to move there to experience for themselves the pure bliss and delight of this of this great success story. I say beware of most anyone the New York Times and the rest of the liberal establishment praises. The Times and these times like all times laud the false prophets.
I honestly thought Br. Michael was joking, plainparson, but maybe not. Maybe he was referring to my comment that BB, being from Virginia, ought to know how to spell a word used predominantly by us southerners, rather than to Akinola’s ghost writer. Racist, though? Awfully strong (displaced) sentiment for something that was said in jest. Still, maybe if Br. Michael knew that I have a biracial neice that love as if she were my own, he might change his tune. Lighten up, Bro.
Br. Michael,
Pride is a sin. As I said, I choose to listen to Bishop Tutu. I’ve been in his audience three times and each time was empowering toward God. I’m doing by best to follow Jesus Christ. I don’t know as much about Bishop Akinola. Perhaps when he is here in the US I will be able to be in his audience.
Hey wamark (#18) – Sounds an awful lot like Nigeria to me.
Hey makersmarc, Maybe so except for all the fleeing white people, the dead and terrorized business people and tourists and, of course, the AIDS rate. Now in Orthodox Uganda AIDS is more than under control… its almost nonexistent. Maybe Tutu should visit there rather than New York, San Francisco and Seattle gleaning accolades. In Uganda he could learn something that would truly help South Africa get through it’s devastating epidemic. But then he’d have to talk about keeping your pants zipped up and that wouldn’t be popular with his American fan club.
I’m with wamark on this one. Tutu has always been a political figure as far as I’m concerned, taking the glory and running when the work starts. I’ve never seen anything Godly about him. He’s never had anything worthy to say about Christianity in the past IMHO, so I see little reason to pay any attention to him now.
It’s interesting to contrast this story with the one about Mother Teresa’s seemingly life long crisis of faith. It’s clear Tutu doesn’t suffer from such things. His faith in what he thinks, regardless of scripture or tradition, seems boundless.
wamark – Maybe so, but that’s (keeping pants zipped) is hardly a uniquely American problem.
nor a uniquely South African problem for that matter.
#24 A.) Really! It seems to me smarmy Madison Ave. sex ads to promote almost everything from autos to zanax, Hollywood style morals and its great product…movies and tv, together with the Stonewall/Christopher Street/gay agenda are all uniquely American in their manufacture. And like McDonalds and Starbucks, are our other magnificent contributions to contemporary world pop culture. What a stunning legacy.
B.) Possibly not uniquely a South African problem but what is a unique South African problem is the South African black male who sees it as his right to spread his “seed” far and wide among as many women and girls as possible. Tutu and South Africa’s government have yet to address this “unique” South African problem and the resulting AIDS explosion.
makersmarc: “How exactly does one criticize a bishop who so thoroughly embodies catholicity…”
By looking at catholicity from a “universal church” sense. In that sense, Tutu’s comments don’t embody catholicity, they undermine it.
Sorry you don’t agree…
Let’s back up. Why was the accusation made that Minns wrote the communication? If he did and Akinola signed off on it then it is Akinolos communication. Akinola gets the glory and the criticism. If not then are you saying the Akinola was to “what” to write it?
Oh, c’mon wamark. Hollyweird and Madison Ave. are about as representative of America as a whole as the GS is to the AC. These pop-culture influences notwithstanding (albeit true), our legacy as a nation, its sacrifices and contributions, are far far far greater than the momentary influences of the sex trade in NYC.
An attitude of the birthright of a male to “spread his seed” is uniquely South African? Are you serious? When was the last time you were at any high school in any country on this planet. *Uniquely* South African?! What a perspective you have!
Wamark – don’t fault Tutu for the AIDS crisis there – he was ahead of his time speaking out about what should be done. It was the governments refusal to follow there for so long that helped make the crisis. Mandela’s successor in fact denied AIDS even existed for so long. And, as someone who volunteers in AIDS education/outreach – I can echo the earlier comment that you don’t want to compare South Africa to Nigeria and Uganda. It’s in Nigeria where there’s a widespread belief that one can be cured of AIDS by having sex with a virgin. I don’t blame Akinola for that, nor should anyone. Similarly, don’t blame Tutu for South Africa – if the country would have listened to him at the right time they wouldn’t be in the plight they’re currently in. All of the AIDS victims in Africa and elsewhere need our prayers.
First of all, Br. Mike, Akinola claims is as “personal” and it isn’t. Second, we’re not talking about a professional writer protecting his identity. If it’s someone else’s work, and you claim credit for it, that’s usually called plagiarism, though in this case I wouldn’t quite call it plagiarism as much as simply lacking in integrity by not being honest right up front about Minns writing it, but Akinola agreeing with it.
And just FYI – I’ve reread it several times and your last sentence in #28 doesn’t make any sense. Not being snarky; just don’t understand what you’re saying.
Br. Michael – There is a news story out saying Minns made extensive changes to the letter, amounting to 2/3s of it. The letter must have been sent out electronically and it had been made with software which tracked the changes. It’s really hard to say. Akinola did sign off on it and it would be tough to show that the changes were done with out Akinola’s approval or were not his idea after consultation. The implication of the story is that because Minns’ made the changes they are his words and that Americans unduly influenced the letter and Akinola’s position.
Makersmarc – now you are jumping to some huge conclusions. Just because you can show someone else typed something it doesn’t mean what was typed wasn’t the original writer’s words and it certainly doesn’t come close to plagiarism. Who’s to say this wasn’t typed out by Minn’s after consultation with Akinola by phone or email?
Here is a link to the story about the letter:
http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/content.asp?id=43511
Yes, Rocks, it is speculation, but then you are jumping to just as huge a conclusion to posit that Minns just took dictation from Akinola. In the same way that we can pretty well tell whether a NT letter was written by Paul or someone else, the writing style was so markedly different, and the process of changes that the software apparently indicates as redaction rather than dictation, it’s safer to conclude that the work belongs to someone else. Maybe we each see what we want to see and the truth lies somewhere between. Until Akinola or Minns offer some clarifications, I’ll tend toward my conclusions.
Besides, Rocks, Akinola has proven himself quite capable of saying what’s on his mind all on his own, so why start resorting to a ghost writer now? Sumpm ain’t right about this.
Makersmark, What perspective do I have on the South African problem? …simply this attendance at AIDS conferences, having received awards for helping to abate the AIDS epidemic, communing and praying with people dying of AIDS, speaking directly to African Bishops, African priests, African laity and social workers about AIDS in Africa. And so, while many American teens may experiment sexually America’s high culture ridicules anyone who suggests chastity as a solution. American morals today unlike the WWII generation and previous generations (that were indeed great) are in the toilet. So, yes, my conversations have indeed confirmed for me that many South African black males see it as their right to spread their “seed” far and wide, even if they are married, among as many girls and women as possible. It is a fact not fiction. And very different from teen experimentation.
Now, how many AIDS conferences have you attended? How many African Bishops have you talked to? How many social worked from Africa do you know? How many AIDS death have you witnessed after praying and giving them communion to those who are dying? AND just how many AIDS funerals have you presided over to gain your perspective?
Actually you are the only one jumping to a conclusion. Akinola was actually in Virginia and meeting with Minns in the days prior to the release of this letter. This letter is not markedly different from others from Akinola. In fact it pretty consistent with past letters.
And since Akinola was actually in Virginia it’s no great leap to think that he was dictating. Nor is it in any way unsual that he should consulte with one of his Bishops. Especially when you consider that he works closely with Minns and this directly relates to the US.
There’s nothing to suggest that these ideas and words are not Akinola’s and certainly nothing that proves he used a ghost writer.
[i] This thread is about Archbishop Tutu, not Archbishop Akinola. Please return to the original thread. [/i]
wamark 18: I suppose you’re going to convince us that apartheid was better, right?
You are so far off the mark as to be shocking. Laughable if it weren’t so tragic that there are others who believe as you do. Br. Michael, you might want to repoint your finger accusing “racist.”
Yeah, we’ve gotten far afield; sorry about that. Time to return, not only to the original thread, but to the original bed. Thanks Rocks and others. You’ll help in preparing my sermon for Sunday (the collect sets the tone, focusing on unity.) Night all.
Dear padrewayne…Thanks for your reliable liberal knee jerk reaction and pejorative remarks. Maybe I should just slink because I am so humbled, chastened and wounded by your withering logic. Once again you lose the argument because you resort to slander. And I’m sorry but I don’t get either my theology or politics from Atlantic Monthly, the New York Times, or Psychology Today. But we do need to get back to Desmond Tutu and his lack of credibility. He is, after all a star and the darling of the western liberal establishment.
As far as my views on South Africa its past, present and future they were formed by my economics professor who was the daughter of the British Ambassador to Kenya and grew up in Africa. Although a liberal politically and with PhD from the University of Chicago, she decried the shocking ignorance of the typical American liberal with regard to South Africa. She said they didn’t know what they were talking about and encouraged us not to accept the pat answers of the American press and liberal establishment and do research, learn and think for ourselves…and I did. Apartheid may have been wrong but post-apartheid South Africa is an economic and social disaster. Western enlightened liberals just cast a blind eye toward the mess they helped to create.
And so I ask you Padre…how many meals have you taken to people suffering from AIDS? How many AIDS patients have you sat with until they breathed their last? How many AIDS patients have you communed and prayed with as they lay dying? How many AIDS funerals have you presided over? I served in San Francisco for 20 years and I’ll bet my experience tops yours any day!
I liked Tutu back in the 80s when he was bravely resisting apartheid AND the murderous hotheads in the crowds ‘necklacing’ ‘collaborators’, and I didn’t pay much attention to his theology, which I think was fairly conventional Anglo-Catholicism laced with liberationism.
But it’s clear that his own theology, insofar as he still has one, has become post-Christian universalism (‘God’s rainbow people’ and similar fatuities), and Tutu has said some very harsh things about Christian orthodoxy, along with predictable reactve leftist rants about the USA and Bushitlerburton.
His pro-gay advocacy may owe something to the fact that gays in NY raised money for his cancer treatment. I think Tutu is aware of the dreadful mess that South Africa is in and is sad that those bright dreams of 1994 are proving very elusive. But having gone down a political route, he finds it hard to recover the voice of a priest and summon people to a personal morality – which his increasing theological radicalism has undermined in any case.
Meanwhile, while violence swamps SA cities, those white South Africans who can have packed for the UK, Australia and elsewhere.
# 43: “This revelation (i.e. the writer’s opinion) is LIKELY to damage Akinola’s already SAGGING (oh, the weight!) prestige in Nigeria, where he MAY now be perceived as a mouthpiece for wealthy Westerners. (‘BOO, WHITEY!’) And it is LIKELY to damage his credibility with his fellow Primates, who were already WEARY (‘Oh, no, not again!’) of his practice of interupting their meetings to take counsel from Minns and Sugden.â€
The ‘Church Tombs’ strikes again – never confusing fact with wishful thinking.
Desmond has said some really objectionable things in the past, this from 2005:
http://mcj.bloghorn.com/1634
He can’t be allowed to coast on his 1980s aparatheid work…..
# 46 – yep, that’s Desi Rent-a-quote all right. & guess what he thinks about Israel? He doesn’t believe in the infallibility of the pope, only himself.
What has he said or done to halt South Africa’s slide into Aids and violence?
I hope that you will be patient with me, elves.
For those who were interested in the Mary in Scripture thread well down the line here, I have posted a reading of the Greek text that is very clear about the status of “Mary Ever Virgin,’ namely that the text makes it clear that she cannot be so. Clear scripture is the standard or it is not. I hope you will read it. I put these two notes on because the post is so far down the line. I won’t do this again, elves, I promise, but the getting the Greek text right was some real trouble. Larry
I, too, honor Tutu for his anti-apartheid work. But I was shocked when I heard the man speak a little over a year ago. Very nearly walked out, all universalist claptrap mixed with Marx (which was quoted like and intermixed with Scripture. Several people I talked to thought it WAS Scripture until I told them it was lifted verbatim out of the Communist Manifesto). People can be great in one area and horrible in another, happens every day.
Desmond Tutu was and remains a leftist with a similar theology to KJS. Nothing to admire there, other than I understand he is a charming man and he has been one of the few prominent South Africans to speak out against Mugabe’s destruction of Zimbabwe.
Dear Bishop Tutu –
We are beyond, WAY BEYOND what you suggest. Keep “talking”, keep “dialogue”, keep “conversing”….while the revisionists keep changing, ignoring, excluding those who believe in the Word, and creating a massive false idol….a church built in their own image. With all respect for the accomplishments you have achieved in your life – For you to pretend to be in the middle here is a complete JOKE. If you are with the revisionists (which I believe you to be), then you have made yourself something of a black widow spider. Do you intend to keep reasserters in an ETERNAL death grip? Count me out. When I see bishops like Katherin Schori, John Chane and Creighton Robertson on their knees publicly asking God for forgiveness for doing everything in their power to destroy the Church, I’ll buy-in to your plea to keep everyone at the table.
And while “y’all” are busy taking pot shots at one another and arguing about semantics, ++Tutu is certainly right in his vision of a weeping Christ. Get back to what he said: is it possible, in the end, to gather together to worship, to celebrate, and to empower one another to continue Jesus’ mission in the world? Call me any name or title or label you wish…I am in the end trying to end each day having brought more brothers and sisters to Christ than I have alienated, severed, or dismembered.
Fr. Shawn,
I agree with midwest. When we see those in authority in TEC who are publically denying the Christ of the Scriptures and ignore the mission of spreading the Gospel in favor of “inclusion” and then who persecute those who try to follow Jesus’ teachings fall on their knees seeking repentance, I will be happy to worship with them again.
Library Jim,
I’m sorry if I’ve ever intentionally barred you from worship. Sadly, my faith is that God has given me one perspective on inclusiveness and a very broad understanding of the Christ both in and beyond scriptures. I know that God has given you a faith by which you read and live out your scriptural call. I pray for repentence every day from the sins I commit, and I make my promise to God that I will do better. I can guarantee that what you and I think of as the greatest of sins are most certainly in a different hierarchy. Christians have spent the last two millennia arguing and warring about how holy is holy, not only among themselves but with non-Christians. Still, I am not judgemental enough to hold you accountable for committing what I call sin; nor do I require you to prove to me that your repentance is sincere. I’ll leave that to God. As for me, I love God with my heart/soul/mind/strength, and I love you as I love myself. And in that spirit of reconciliation, I would sit down to the Lord’s Table and share in the Holy Communion.
Fr. Shawn,
It’s not that, the problem is with those in TEC who have no concept (apparently) of what it means to be a Christian, who deny that Jesus is even necessary for salvation (who even question whether He existed or not!); who then turn around and persecute those who follow a Biblical faith.
Surely you can see why it is impossible for those who call ourselves ‘orthodox’ to worship with those who cast aside even the basics of the Christian faith as preached and taught for 2,000 years?
How can we fellowship with non-believers (as St. Paul warns us)?
How can we study and proclaim the “Word of God written”, with those who say, “it’s just another book, of no more value than “Gone with the Wind”, those who don’t believe God has spoken in it’s pages, and meant what He said (and claim we can re-write those passages with which we disagree);
how can we share the Lord’s body and blood with those who say it’s just bread and wine — Christian baptism and belief are not necessary to recieve;
who not only are NOT repentant in their lives (and flaunt their sins and insist we call them ‘holy’), but also see no need for repentance of anything except intolerance, then turn around and practice that same intolerance of real Christians. Yes, I said “real Christians”, for those in TEC are clearly only ‘play-acting’ being Chrisitan since they deny any connection to historic, creedal Christianity.
Not only have these people ‘barred us from worship’ but they have also cast us out of “their” churches, sued us over property we have sweated and labored over, barred us from speaking or having roles at diocesean and general conventions, and declared our ordinations invalid (the ‘our’ is not a personal ‘our’ but a ‘collective’ one). The onus is not on the orthodox who sing “stand up, stand up for Jesus”, but on those who tell us to shut up, sit down, and roll over and play dead because we are standing in their way of taking over the Church which our fathers built in martyr’s blood.
Those are the people who hinder my worship with them. Maybe you don’t fit that category (and I hope you don’t!), but surely you can see others who do! Please stop fence sitting and join us in calling them to repent and turn back to the faith of Jesus, the Apostles and the Fathers.
Peace
Jim Elliott
libraryjim,
I can read the pain in your comment – and I think that ++Tutu would also perceive that pain. I, too, am disappointed, in the behaviors of many people on the extreme sides of the church – I am most assuredly what you would call a liberal revisionist, but am passionate about being militantly moderate as well. I recall Jesus’ parable about presenting gifts at the altar. He didn’t say present your gift and stay in conflict with your bretheren; he said make amends and reconcile with your bretheren, and then come to the altar. We still all approach the altar, but how can we not approach it if we see someone with who we disagree or even vehemently diverge from theologically? Jesus’ own admonishment tells us that if we want our sacrifice to be acceptable to God, we MUST be reconciled with one another. Until that time, until the time we can in confidence stand side by side in all our brokenness and diverse thinking, recognizing our common humanity, the humanity that Jesus Christ came to save, can we honestly say that any of our offerings at the altar are acceptable?
He also told us to ‘shake the dust from our feet’ when faced with a group who will not accept His Gospel message.
Pause for thought there in the midst of all the (false) talk of Jesus’ total inclusiveness. He was very dividing and quick to point out that ‘families would be against each other’ because of Him, and that he came not to bring peace but a sword. we can try to reconcille, but those who will not acept the message are to be treated ‘as a tax collector’ to us. Reconciliation will not happen when/until the person who has strayed and committed the actions accept the fact that they have strayed adn committed sins against the Body of Christ. So far, the leadership of TEC has not seen that, and accuse the faithful of being the ones ‘abandoning the communion’ while acting all self-righteous about MDG’s, inclusivity, etc.
The inclusive message preached today is not the same as the one preached by Jesus. To take the Gospel at heart means taking the ENTIRE Gospel, not just the parts that sound good, and that includes separation from those who will not follow Him.