Background to the Gafcon Conference From the Church of Uganda

Who is organizing GAFCON?

GAFCON was conceived by the Anglican Archbishops of Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, the Southern Cone (South America), and Sydney (Australia). Evangelical Anglican Bishops from the UK and the USA were also involved in its organization.

How many people will participate in GAFCON?

More than 1,000 people have registered for GAFCON, including more than 280 Bishops, their wives, clergy and non-ordained church leaders. One hundred and seven (107) people from Uganda will be going, including 34 Bishops.

Why is GAFCON being held in Jerusalem?

GAFCON is essentially a pilgrimage. We are going back to the roots of our faith, to the place where Jesus was born, lived, died, and was raised from the dead.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * International News & Commentary, Anglican Provinces, Church of Uganda, Global South Churches & Primates, Middle East

14 comments on “Background to the Gafcon Conference From the Church of Uganda

  1. venbede says:

    These orthodox provinces and leaders will be the nucleus
    of a new communion in the not too distant future. Let’s roll.

  2. Cole says:

    It is too bad that Uganda’s statement can’t be printed on the back of the Lambeth Conference Program along with a compass rose with its sight line pointing to the Holy Land. ‘ So many lost sheep carrying their own Shepherd’s staff!

  3. A Floridian says:

    May true His Anglican Church shed her fetters, bonds and dust, rise like the dawn, shine with His Beauty and join the Church of the Ages to reveal and live holy Truth, Love, Life before all the earth. Isaiah 52:1-7

  4. badman says:

    One thing that anyone who has ever been to Jerusalem can tell you is that the world does not need a new communion. There are too many different communions already.

  5. venbede says:

    #4: I don’t think more communions are better. However,the current Anglican Communion is broken beyond repairing. The best bet is to start over with those provinces and leaders who hold to, and live by, the traditional formularies.

  6. Cennydd says:

    “The current Anglican Communion is broken beyond repairing.” Just try telling that to Schori and Company, and see how far it gets you!

  7. venbede says:

    Cennydd, I believe you and I are both in provinces overseen by primates outside the US (I’m a member of an AMiA church) so what the leadership of TEC thinks really has no bearing (I realize there are ugly legal repercussions still playing out). Ultimately TEC will not be part of a newly formed orthodox communion, whether it’s a new communion in name or in fact, so their understanding or lack thereof won’t figure in. Sounds good, doesn’t it?

  8. Alice Linsley says:

    I admire Archbishop Akinola and his hard-working staff, and I will defend them vigourously as long as they oppose TEC’s compromise of the Gospel, but this statement on women priests is a compromise, and I pray that they might see how that is so.

    I left a comment/plea at the Global South Anglican site asking them to read some essays on the priesthood, its African origins, and gender-specific context which points to the Blood of Jesus Christ.

  9. venbede says:

    Alice,

    It’s my understanding that the Global South provinces have differing views on WO. The statement here isn’t a compromise. It’s a statement of the Church of Uganda’s policy. Nigeria’s is different.

  10. Brian from T19 says:

    I have to say that I have great admiration for ++Orombi. He is a man of principle and is very clear-headed about the issues. However, I do wonder about this:

    Their Bishops and many clergy have presided at the blessing of same-sex unions.

    What bishops have presided at the blessing of same-sex unions?

  11. Alice Linsley says:

    Thanks, #9, for the correction. I wrote that before my morning coffee. : )

    I too respect Archbishop Orombi. He is a true saint! This Church of Uganda “policy” is based on its interpretation of the creation of males and females equally in the image and likeness of God, but that is not the principle behind the gender-specific nature of the priesthood. The biblical picture of equality requires binary distinction between the life-giving blood shed by females in birthing and the life-giving blood shed by priests in animal sacrifice.

    As far as I know the Church of Nigeria doesn’t have women priests. I hope it won’t compromise on this issue.

  12. venbede says:

    #10, I think it would have been better (and accurate) to say “Many of their bishops and clergy [i]approve[/i] of the blessing of same sex unions.”

  13. Cennydd says:

    Venbede, I don’t think I’m alone in saying that TEC’s leaders are surreptitiously creating a new communion; The Episcopal Communion, as a matter of fact. This is true when one considers that there are something in the neighborhood of sixteen overseas jurisdictions within TEC…..provinces, missionary districts and dioceses……primarily in Europe, Asia, and Central America, and with the Church in Brazil as their satellite in South America. And ALL of them receive a large measure of financial support from TEC’s coffers.

    Does the Anglican Communion need their financial support, or should I say “domination?” The answer to that is “yes,” but only because they’ve depended upon it for so long that they can’t imagine anything else! Would they be able to stand on their own financially? Not without TEC…..and that’s why TEC continues to be so dominant in the Communion. It’s also why nothing will ever change. All the more reason for us to dump them like a sack of rotten potatoes and get on with the REAL work of Christ and His Church.

  14. venbede says:

    After my last post it occured to me that there are already two de facto communions within the Anglican Communion, an orthodox one and a revisionist one. I know shades of gray exist, but all that remains is for someone to make it official. The orthodox communion will be able to make do on its reduced budget. I recall that God took care of Elijah without any problems via ravens and brook when he was obedient. In fact, I was reading in 1 Kings 17 this morning. Does this sound familiar? Beginning with vs. 17, King Ahab says: “Is that you, you troubler of Israel?” 18 “I have not made trouble for Israel,” Elijah replied. But you and your father’s family have. You have abandoned the Lord’s commands and have followed the Baals…” Aren’t the orthodox often blamed for being the source of disunity, “troublers of Israel”, etc.? I think Elijah put it pretty succinctly.