5. We believe at this present critical juncture in the history of the Anglican Communion it is important for churches outside the traditional Anglo-American trajectories to offer a distinct and critical theological voice: speaking from the context of the global South, offering a theological articulation on issues facing the Communion as we see and read it to the deliberations in the Communion, and giving expression to the trajectories of God’s divine work in our histories.
6. We recognise that we need to draw strength from one another’s insights from the diverse socio-political contexts we serve, and to rediscover and share together how we can best uphold and pass on the faith once delivered to the saints.
7. We commit ourselves to work for the common good of the Communion, with the view that it would rediscover its moorings in the faith and worship of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church of Jesus Christ, and that our churches would be a sign of hope and reconciliation in this broken world.
This is worrisome because Singapore and Brazil do not share a common hermeneutic or understanding of the Scriptures. Although the overall direction is clear the foundation is sandy. Just what are John Chew and Singapore getting into, having already been rescued from Northern European liberal domination??
Brazil might be south, but it ain’t Global South. Rather, they are a bunch of TEO lackeys.
So, what is Canada south of? The Arctic?
What about a conservative Methodist that grew up witht he 39 Articles?
Don
Quick–we need to take a step back on this one. There are only four signatories, one from Brazil, Kenya, Canada (Indigenous Ministry) and Singapore–and they describe their effort as one born out of their friendship. They sign as “conveners” and thus there may be others involved. But I would encourage a slower response than reflected above.
There are two dynamics in the declaration that are worth noting.
1. Global South in this context does not mean south of the equator. It is a name taken to identify those outside the “western” centers of power. Thus the Indigenous Canadian signs on, affirming that the Church in Canada does not reflect his community’s theology or thinking.
2. The participants are theologians calling for honest theological work to be done and voiced from the perspective of the Global South. The GS has questions and experiences that do not match American and British experiences across the board. GAFCon for instance referred to the dynamic of colonialism–the West was the source of colonial influence, the GS was the recipient of that colonial influence. But as theologians the document in paragraph 7 commit themselves to the historic (orthodox) faith of the church.
I conclude then that Michael Poon is being consistent to say that the Asian Church needs to voice the orthodox biblical faith with Asian perspective even as the Brazilian Church needs to do the same; that further none of the participants want to be the theological “lackeys” of anybody. They want the solid Gospel which speaks powerfully into their own context.
That is salt; that is yeast. That is a hopeful reminder that the Word of God is not bound by Western culture or any culture, but speaks to all cultures to transform us according to the eternal purposes of God in Christ Jesus.
Mark Macdonald is an thorough-going institutionalist first in TEO and now the AOoC