In a joint statement issued after a “Consultation of Bishops in Dialogue” meeting held in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania the church leaders said they had shared testimonies about partnership mission work. Through this a common thread had emerged “our experience of finding ourselves in each other.”
“Across the globe, across the Communion, we actually really need one another,” the bishops’ statement said. “We are stronger in relationship than when we are apart. This, we believe, is a work of engaging in Communion building rather than Communion breaking. In the words of the Toronto Congress of 1963 we are engaged in living in ‘mutual responsibility and interdependence’ (Ephesians 2:13-22)”.
The bishops hailed from Sudan, Botswana, Malawi, Burundi, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa, Canada, the United States and England. They met at the end of February as a group of partner pairs and triads and discussed a range of issues including human sexuality, slavery and tackling poverty.
Update: An ENS article appears here also.
The fine print: Funded by Trinity Wall Street lucre. Did the Americans bring chickens to bribe the third world-ers?
So, once again, unity is more important than holding to essential doctrine? I don’t accept that, but then, I’m just a layman.
In Him
Jim <><
One look at some of the Canadian bishops who signed tells me to run away.
Any time bishops from TEC and the ACofC show up at a gathering like this one, something sinister’s going on, and you can bet they’ll do their best to put their own special interest groups’ interests before everything else; things such as homosexuality, for example. And “filthy Wall Street lucre?” You bet!
SET UP!! This has Jefferts-Scari written all over it.
I admit that when I saw the names of the US and Canadian signers, I suspected the worst. I’d be more reassured if it had been signed by bishops from Rwanda, Uganda, and Nigeria whose names I recognized. But I don’t have any reason to dismiss all the African signers as merely pragmatic appeasers on the lookout for the big US buck$.
Do we have to be so quick to discount genuine efforts to overcome the divisions that reflect so badly on the Church, so hasty to make judgments about whom we should be in Communion with, and who should be out? It isn’t obvious to me that this group got together to deny any essential doctrine, or that +KJS’s hand is in this. Remembering that we’re in the Body of Christ only because of Jesus’ gracious call ought to keep us humble and compassionate.
“When the church ceases to be one, or ceases to be missionary, it contracts its own nature…
“The church does not depend for its existence upon [i]our[/i] understanding of it or faith in it. It first of all exists as a visible fact called into being by the Lord Himself, and our understanding of that fact is subsequent and secondary…
“…[The church] derives its character not from its membership but from its Head, not from those who join it but from Him who called it into being…” (Lesslie Newbigin, [i]The Household of God[/i].)
Pax Christi!
Chuck Bradshaw+
Hulls Cove, Maine
Chuck,
the group may not have gotten together to ‘deny any essential doctrine’ but two of the big representatives, the US and Canada, are leaders of provinces that HAVE and ARE denying essential doctrine in word and deed and legislative process, and are suing and deposing those who stand for that doctrine. Therein lies the problem.
In Him,
Jim <><
How sad it is to see African bishops who once stood for something (Mpgango a long time ago at least) now involved in fronting for harlotry. The love of money is a strong and sinister force–among those evil powers that corrupt and destroy the creatures of God even the 1979 Prayer Book calls upon the faithful to renounce. Reminds me of what you can see on Bourbon Street only a few miles down the road from where I live.
Hey Brien, we can’t even have church on Sunday because Pass Christian is paralyzed with Mardi Gras madness today. Literally you can’t get anywhere near the church for the parades, drinking, and other “events”. [i]Laissez le bon temps rouler?[/i]
RE: “Do we have to be so quick to discount genuine efforts to overcome the divisions that reflect so badly on the Church, so hasty to make judgments about whom we should be in Communion with, and who should be out?”
Yes, I think we do, when the foundational assumption that signifies these “efforts” are that those things which are dividing us are secondary issues and not indicative of a deep chasm between two gospels.
In the real world they didn’t meet to promote reconciliation.
I posted the following about this on the Covenant site:
What I find disturbing about this statement is that it reeks of yet more Western imperialism.
Consider who funded it: The Anglican Church of Canada, The Diocese of Toronto Foundation, The Episcopal Church, The Fellowship of the Maple Leaf and Trinity Church Wall Street.
Who organized, facilitated and resourced it: Anglican Church of Canada
Who supplied the “staffâ€: Anglican Church of Canada
Where the “observers†were from: 3 from Trinity Church Wall Street (and note that Trinity Wall Street is well known for doling out generous grants to “deserving†Anglicans across the globe), 1 from The Episcopal Church, and 1 from Diocese of Mombasa Communications
Considering the above, then, notice that the Canadian bishops who attended Michael Bird (Niagara), George Bruce (Ontario), John Chapman (Ottawa), Terry Dance (Huron), Michael Ingham (New Westminster) and Colin Johnson (Toronto) include all the most ardent same-sex normalization advocates in the Canadian House of Bishops. Note also that this group is made up of at least 10 advocates for the liberal position (9 of whom are white western liberals) and 9 African bishops who might (but might not) be more conservative.
The wording of this statement was most assuredly written by a native English speaker, and has the writing style of liberal North Americans.
So we have a meeting that
1) is organized and facilitated by western liberals;
2) is paid for by western liberals;
3) is observed by some western liberals who just happen to have very deep pockets and are known to be quite generous financially to “deserving†Third World Anglicans (wink, wink, nudge, nudge);
4) is composed of a majority of western liberals including the very bishops who have most egregiously violated the Communion’s moratoria; and
5) released a statement that was clearly authored by western liberals and which basically states what the western liberals who paid for, organized, and “observed†this meeting and wrote the statement wanted it to say.
*****************
I am guessing that the intended audience of this piece is not Global South Anglicanism, but rather other westerners who are uncomfortable with the strident anti-moratoria advocacy of bishops such as Bird, Ingham, etc. The intended message is “only a few bossy African archbishops are upset with us – most have no problem with what we are doing.†This is propaganda targeted to a western audience. Again, one only needs to see the language of the statement to realize that.
I would also like to suggest that this isn’t KJS’s project. This has “Canada” stamped all over it, but because the Anglican Church of Canada has no money, and because it would also help out TEC, they were able to have Trinity Wall Street cough up the bribe money.
When one considers all the evidence, it becomes clear that the purpose of this statement is not to promote “reconciliation” or greater unity in the Anglican Communion – rather it is to provide cover for divisive North American liberals to continue their divisive ways.
#12 jamesw – well done.
Well let’s see – it is a statement which expresses the blindingly obvious in infantalised language to make an entirely different point!
I would say it has all the fingerprints of Rowan Williams, the ACO Dublin gang and Canon Phil [listen to me or else] Groves all over it – which I expect is why ACNS is bigging it up.
Death by Indaba – brought to you by the Druid. LOL!