The head of the Anglican Church in the Middle East, Bishop Mouneer Anis of Egypt, has also urged caution about the date and venue of the Jerusalem meeting. In correspondence with the meeting’s chief organizer, Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria, Anis cited internal Anglican political considerations in opposing a June gathering.
He also questioned meeting in Jerusalem, saying it was unlikely Palestinian Anglicans would support the meeting “for various reasons.”
Arab Anglican leaders are concerned the conference, known as GAFCON, could wreck the Anglican Church’s carefully balanced position within Palestinian society and the Anglican Communion.
The Palestinian church is strongly opposed to gay or female clergy and follows the conservative tradition within Anglicanism. However, it receives financial support from American dioceses that are at the forefront of the gay rights movement. Highlighting the diocese’s conservative position in the midst of the Anglican Communion’s civil war over homosexuality could have immediate financial consequences, church leaders note.
George Conger is to be congratulated for hard work here.
This particular exchange is not good; it will be read by anyone hostile to Communion discipline as an example of +Akinola disregarding even his own GS colleagues.
“It is my region, and I know it better than you,” Anis told Akinola, cautioning against an overt pro-Israel spin to the meeting. “To say we will do a pilgrimage to attract bishops, and [that] yet it is not entirely a pilgrimage, is not right in my point of view.”
Akinola responded that the organizers had considered the Egyptian bishop’s concerns, but had come to the “unanimous conclusion” to go ahead with the Jerusalem meeting.
**
It is important to get this mended. Divisions in the GS only mean that discipline via Primates or Instruments is set back. I hate to say that we have cautioned tirelessly about this…
Having the meeting in Jerusalem can expose the hypocrisy of the Jerusalem Anglicans for condemning homosexuality but taking (lots of) TEC money. I hope that nobody floats pictures of the bishop of Jerusalem chumming around with Bruno.
Liberals would argue that having the meeting in Jerusalem might also expose the hypocrisy of certain Global South leaders who condemn American cultural and economic imperialism but take (lots of) American money from anti-Palestinian, pro-State of Israel sources. This is not, and should not be, about who takes money from whom—one assumes that Christians will do what is right regardless of their financial self-interest—but about who is more faithful to Anglican principles. One of those key principles is that we seek mutual responsibility and interdependence in the Body of Christ. That notion is pretty obviously violated when outsiders, whether from America, Australia, or Africa, think they have the right to dictate to a local Anglican community on matters that critically affect its ministry and even its survival.
They’re having a meeting, Dale. Nothing more, nothing less. If that is going to set off the Muslims, then they’re looking for something to set them off. And where was that deep, abiding concern for “mutual responsibility and interdependence in the Body of Christ” when TEC was stampeding to pop that pointy hat onto VGR? AWOL.
The number of Anglicans who live in the ‘West Bank’ is about 500; there are rather more living in Israel, with a good number of Jewish heritage, including those at Christ Church Jerusalem, in Galilee and Haifa. As far as ‘the West Bank’ is concerned, the diocese of Jerusalem is largely a Potemkin church. Why the feelings of Fatah and Islamists should decide whether Christians meet in the capital of Israel is hard for me to fathom; I know we didn’t consult the PLO when a church group I belonged to went to Israel/West Bank about 16 years ago. On the other hand I do understand the fear of ME Christians caused by the murderous oppression of Islamists (one thinks of the recent murders in Gaza of Baptists), an attitude that is supplemented by the advocacy of Palestinian nationalism by people like Naim Ateek and ex-Bishop Riah. It is a very difficult thing to be a Christian in the ME because of the evil of Islamism. In the end, the venue for GAFCON is not that important, but it would be a pity – and evidence of the dhimmi-mindset – if fear of Islam ended up controlling the agenda.
Well done 5. I don’t remember of any Conservative Global South Primate talking about American Imperialism, they talk against WEST LIBERAL LEFT. Akinola him self is PRO BUSH, when he won his second term, Akinola send a letter to him saying how blessed was America in having him as President. Many of us(no Americans) think that Bush was wrong about Iraq, but any one does mistakes. I am pro Israel. Why the 500 anglicans don,t ask to join their brothers in Israel. From Palestinians Christians to Arabe-Israeli Christians.
[b]”Highlighting the diocese’s conservative position in the midst of the Anglican Communion’s civil war over homosexuality could have immediate financial consequences, church leaders note.”[/b]
It is all about the money. See [url=http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=797 ]here[/url] about an article about Rt Rev Suheil Dawani’s “enthronement.” In particular, the article states,
and
and also this from David Virtue’s [url=http://listserv.episcopalian.org/wa.exe?A2=ind0701a&L=virtueonline&P=191 ]site[/url],
I imagine that Bp Dawani is worried indeed about his being in bed with Bruno, Sisk, Ingham, etc., becoming well known in his very conservative environs.
I would think that +Akinola realizes the concern here is over the loss of liberal money more than anything else. And if so, I doubt that he will be very impressed as he and other poor African provinces have singed off any liberal money. So can the Middle East Anglicans.
Responding to #5:
The Diocese of Jerusalem today has thirty-four institutions spread across the different countries that it covers. Two more institutions are yet to be opened in Palestine. Four other institutions are affiliated to the Diocese in partnership relationships. The Diocese employs about 1500 people. It has about 5000 students in its schools and about 200 beds in its hospitals. The Bishop cares for 29 parishes, 29 priests, 6 deacons and about 7,000 Anglicans across
the Diocese.
(From the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem website)
#9: Yes, I read that website too, tho’ I can’t vouch for how up to date it is. What the website doesn’t tell you is where the parishes and churches are, spread over several countries. I do think there are more Anglicans in Israel proper (Jerusalem, Nazareth, Haifa and probably Tel Aviv) than the West Bank – and maybe none now in Gaza, thanks to Hamas, and probably more in Jordan than elsewhere. Meanwhile, the number of Christians in the ‘West Bank’ keeps going down as Islamism spreads.
It’s astonishing that a diocese of ‘7000 people’ can claim to employ 1500 people; it’s obviously in receipt of a lot of foreign money – a lot from Tec, maybe? Somebody has to pay for Ateek’s ‘Sabeel’ as well. (A name that resonates well with a famed Islamic turn of phrase: ‘jihad fa-sabeel-allah’.) St George’s Cathedral gets a lot of foreign money and hosts many international gatherings, study programs etc. How come nobody objects to these? Is it because they have an anti-Zionist tilt and focus on muslim-friendly ‘Abrahamic religion’?
Christ Church Jeruslaem, with its Messianic Christians, doesn’t jive that well with the diocese!