The arrival of Continuing Indaba on the Internet as part of the Anglican Communion web site makes visible the preparatory work already in hand for the series of pilot conversations between dioceses from different parts of the Communion to take place during 2010 and 2011.
Visitors to the new site will find an outline of the project,, which explains its origins as located within an African conversational method for resolving real or potential conflict through mutual listening and debate. The process emerges from the Indaba-style format used at the 2008 Lambeth Conference which is now being expanded to enhance the world-wide Anglican Communion in its quest to intensify relationships in the cause of shared mission.
These pages carry news of the initial series of ”˜hub’ meetings around the world during late 2009 and early 2010 whose remit is to develop resources which can guide and inform the model conversations between participants from dioceses from across the world.
There is also a growing library of the resource papers generated from and through the ”˜hubs’ in order to make them as widely available as possible for those wishing to follow the development of the Continuing Indaba conversations planned for 2010 and 2011….
Futility.
Please, spare me.
[blockquote]
Bless my soul, I’d nearly forgotten. Of course I can’t come with you. I have to be back next Friday to read a paper. We have a little Theological Society down there. Oh yes! there is plenty of intellectual life. Not a very high quality, perhaps. One notices a certain lack of grip – a certain confusion of mind.
From “The Great Divorce” by C. S. Lewis
[/blockquote]
John A., that’s perfect!
The folks who have gone to all this trouble to have someone create this fancy webpage and try to explain the Indaba process are just absolutely clueless about the actual, torn condition of the Anglican Communion, much less how discredited the Indaba process is to “resolve” anything in the Communion. Useless, but I suppose somebody had gainful employment for a period, and may continue to have.
Williams thinks he can bluff out the Global South. A wise man would have taken note of the letters of three important primates and the reception his video received in Singapore, and the Communique which resulted. 80-85% of the Communion have rejected his scheming, but for all his brilliance, he is arrogant, and a fool and so tragically it looks as if he will continue to marginalise himself and undermine his office.
Indabadabadoo!
And that is in spite of leaning on the Living Church!
[blockquote]They dress the wound of my people
as though it were not serious.
‘Peace, peace,’ they say,
when there is no peace.[/blockquote]
Jeremiah said it all, about 2600 years ago.
Don’t they have any idea how ridiculous this all makes them look? “Indaba” is a joke.
[blockquote]
One of the most important features distinguishing between western and African processes of dispute settlement is the manner in which the social relationships between the parties involved in the respective processes are treated. Nader and Todd, referring to the analysis adopted by Gluckman, argue that these relationships are either simplex or multiplex. The relationship determines the procedural form of
the attempt at settlement and thus determines the outcome of the dispute (Nader & Todd 1978:12-13). The ensuing hypothesis is that the parameters of the settlement process are determined by the nature of the relationships involved.
—
The role of the chief was not just restricted to participating in conflict resolution mechanisms, but also to anticipate and, therefore, intercept conflicts.
—
It is clear that the izithebe are unable to compel a statement. This power to compel obedience was a preserve of the court of the headman to which the matter would ordinarily proceed in the event that it remained unresolved (Hammond-Tooke 1975:53).
—
If a person realises that he is in the wrong, or it is apparent to him that his fellow lineage members deem him so, he may impose a fine of a sheep, goat or even a beast on himself to indicate his contrition and to wash away his offence. This ukuzidla is sometimes also resorted to in the headman s court, constituting an admission of guilt. It is known as imali yoku zithandazelo (money of begging for mercy) and is an indication to the court of the sincerity of repentance. In a case where the guilty party imposes a fine on himself that the members of the inkundla regard as inadequate, they regard this as proof that he is not really sorry, and may increase the fine; on the other hand, if he fines himself too heavily, they are likely to reduce it.
(Hammond-Tooke 1975:173)
Chapter 2 of “Traditions of Conflict Resolution in South Africa” by R.B.G. Choudree
[/blockquote]
It seemed to me that the Indaba process as practiced in the communities where it originated must have been more effective and that it must be only partially implemented within the Anglican Communion. This article I found tends to support that view although it does not mention indaba by name.
(I had trouble linking the article but it is easy enough to find)