Primate to snub Williams over gay bishop

Anglicanism's most senior critic of homosexuality is to embarrass the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, by boycotting a top-level meeting in Canterbury today in protest over its first openly gay bishop.

The Primate of Nigeria, Archbishop Peter Akinola, is refusing to attend the meeting of Church leaders, hosted by Dr Williams, because he objects to the presence of the leader of the liberal American Church.

The Archbishop, who heads 17 million Anglicans, is a leading opponent of the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, Bishop Frank Griswold, who defied colleagues by leading the consecration, last November, of Canon Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire.

Dr Akinola, has told friends that to attend the week-long gathering of primates and senior Church members would be a betrayal of his views and those of a majority of Anglicans worldwide. He has described the consecration as "a Satanic attack on the Church".

The snub is the most dramatic indication yet of the splits at the heart of the worldwide Church, and it will fuel speculation that Archbishop Akinola is prepared to break away and lead a rival Anglican Church.

Another critic of Bishop Griswold, the Primate of Central Africa, Archbishop Bernard Malango, is expected to attend the meeting, but only after issuing a scathing attack on the American Church.

The Archbishop accused the liberal leadership of the Episcopal Church of inflicting "a desperately grave wound to the Church", warning that, if it failed to repent, separation would be permanent for the "spiritual safety of our people".

His comments contrasted with those of Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the former Archbishop of Cape Town and a leading liberal, who said at an Ash Wednesday service in London last week that Anglicanism must include everyone, regardless of their sexuality.

The latest hostilities have undermined the efforts of Dr Williams to encourage talks between the warring parties and of the Lambeth Commission set up in October to try to avert schism.

The commission, which is chaired by the Primate of All Ireland, Dr Robin Eames, urged both sides last month to end their use of "strident language" which is threatening to tear the Church apart.

Insiders say that efforts by the commission to broker a deal between the conservatives and liberals, which could allow them to co-exist, has reached a "stalemate".

The meeting in Canterbury of the joint committee of the Primates' standing committee and the standing committee of the Anglican Consultative council is not directly related to the commission, but is regarded as crucial.

Does anyone know exactly what this "week long gathering" is? And what about the other Primates? Is everyone who declared impaired or even broken Communion just going to show up?

My understanding of what was formerly called the "Eames Commission" and is now being called the "Lambeth Commission" (we are SO careful with nomenclature) is that their mandate was to set out HOW to organize the split in the best way possible. If they are still trying to undo it, then they are utterly doomed to failure. They will NOT in any discipline "one of their own" -- i.e. require any sort of admission of guilt or change of behavior in ECUSA.

We are just marking time until October and then, Goodbye Communion. So many people just don't seem to be able to take that fact in.

The commission, which is chaired by the Primate of All Ireland, Dr Robin Eames, urged both sides last month to end their use of "strident language" which is threatening to tear the Church apart.

Insiders say that efforts by the commission to broker a deal between the conservatives and liberals, which could allow them to co-exist, has reached a "stalemate".

This is precisely why Akinola is right to stay away. What sort of "deal" can account for the apostasy of the Canadian and American churches?

I can only think of one sort of deal: the orthodox churches accept some sort of deal that acknowledges the principle of "do your own thing." It brings to mind Sunday's reading from Matthew:

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. And the tempter came and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread." But he answered, "It is written, "'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"
Then the devil took him to the holy city and set him on the pinnacle of the temple and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down, for it is written, "'He will command his angels concerning you,'and "'On their hands they will bear you up, lest you strike your foot against a stone.'"
Jesus said to him, "Again it is written, 'You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.'" Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to him, "All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me." 0Then Jesus said to him, "Be gone, Satan! For it is written, "'You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.'"
Then the devil left him, and behold, angels came and were ministering to him.

(Matt. 4:1-11)

My opinion is that the commission is to provide some gracious way for the conservatives to surrender to the liberals without losing face. This is how it has always been.

You're partially correct. The revisionists and Rowan William certainly hope that's what will come of it. The orthodox side is going into it on the assumption that the Commission will accept that the American and Canadian churches are wrong, and have to be disciplined. I think this is really what defines the "stalemate."

Akinola's move appears to be a shot across Williams's bows, suggesting that the Commission is actually the Communion's last chance to do the right thing. If it does not, then I think the Anglican Communion is dead. Williams has got to know this. I really think he's hoping to thread the needle without having to decide anything, and push this thing out another couple of years. But it's a forlorn hope.

I'm afraid in our diocese there is no hope, so we are already gone.

The Catholic church in Atlanta is conservative, faithful, and welcoming. The parish we have chosen in particular. What a contrast to the mealy-mouthed heretics across the way.

It pains me greatly to see the church that my family has belonged to since 1795* be rent and torn apart in this manner. All for the ego of a petty, narcissistic little man and his supporters in the hierarchy who said "we want what we want - damn the consequences." Now the consequences are coming home to roost with a vengeance, and they are all so surprised. What a shame, and how shameful.

I know it leaves you between a rock and a hard place, and that's not your fault. Just one more shame to place on the heads of those who started all this trouble. We will be praying for you, and praying hard.

*if you don't count an intervening Methodist here and there. And the 1795 guy was baptised but appears to have been something of a Freethinker judging from his will.

Things to remember about what's going on now:

1. Both Rowan the Fuzzy and Eames the Wimpy are actually pro-homosexual and would be completely ignoring the problem if they thought they could get away with it.

2. Traditionally (and I use that term very loosely) the pro-homosexual left has held an article of faith which says that all conservative Christians are ignorant rednecks who are largely uneducable, and live in housetrailers surrounded by trash. ALL of their theories on how to 'dialog' with conservatives are based on this prejudicial assumption. Because of this dealing with extremely well educated people like ABP Akinola and ABP Malango (who also happen to be African) is a functional impossibility.

3. Another article of faith of the leftist pro-homosexual crowd is that everything (and that means EVERYTHING) is negotiable. There entire universe is based on this premise. Because Biblical Christianity, as represented by ABPs Akinola and Malango among others, starts from the premise that certain things are absolute and not open to debgate or negotiation, actual communication with folks like rowan & eames is pretty much impossible.

Points 2 and 3 above combine to require any sort of functional committee of the type eames is supposed to be chairing a nonstarter. The only folks who do NOT realize this are rowan & eames and their supporters.

Oh and as best I can tell, the week long gathering mentioned in the original article is basically another panic meeting as rowan the fuzzy helplessly watches himself become the last archbishop of Canterbury.

interesting times,

Another article of faith of the leftist pro-homosexual crowd is that everything (and that means EVERYTHING) is negotiable.

I disagree with you on this one. Everything they're for, is not negotiable. Rather, it justifies any tactics necessary to get their way, and any tactics necessary to prevent their defeat. The only things that are "negotiable" are the orthodox beliefs that they're trying to fool us into giving up.

What they count on, is orthodoxy's common assumptions (which we seem to share with the late Neville Chamberlain) that the other side wants essentially the same things we want; and that they are playing by the same set of rules, and are as interested in playing by the rules, as we are.

Furthermore, the revisionists are very patient and tenacious, and they know that we orthodox tend to be short-sighted and prone to overlook subtle inroads on our orthodox beliefs. With patience, and a lot of hard-nosed political maneuvering, they've gained control of the governing mechanisms of the ECUSA, CoE, and the Canadian Church. Why? Because the orthodox portion of the Church lost sight of what we're for. They also recognized and took advantage of the fact that we were so concerned about not "seeming to be mean" that we generally gave in where we should have stood firm.

It wasn't for nothing that Jesus told His disciples to be as wise as serpents. The reason He was able to withstand Satan during his time in the Wilderness, was that He understood Satan.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.