According to Anglican Mainstream:
Witholding invitation to Minns is witholding invitation to all Nigerian Bishops – Akinola
Tuesday May 22nd 2007, 5:42 pm
In response to requests for comments on the Lambeth Conference invitations, Archbishop Peter Akinola reaffirms that the Church of Nigeria is committed to the CAPA commissioned report “The Road to Lambeth”.
Since only the first set of invitations had been sent, it is premature to conclude who will be present or absent at the conference. However, the withholding of invitation to a Nigerian bishop, elected and consecrated by other Nigerian bishops will be viewed as withholding invitation to the entire House of Bishops of the Church of Nigeria.
The Lord bless you as you remain in Christ.
The Venerable AkinTunde Popoola
Director Communication
Office: +234 [0]9 523 6950/ 0987/ 0989 Fax: 1527
Mobile: +234 [0]805 800 1382
E-mail: communicator1@anglican-nig.org , communicator1nig@yahoo.com
Primate’s Office, 24 Douala Str., Wuse Zone 5, P.O. Box 212 ADCP, Abuja,
F.C.T., Nigeria.
CANA has issued this Statement by Bishop Minns on Lambeth Conference:
(Fairfax, Virginia) — A statement was issued by the Anglican Communion Office on May 22 regarding the Lambeth Conference of Anglican Communion bishops scheduled for July 2008. The Rt. Rev’d Martyn Minns, Missionary Bishop of CANA (Convocation of Anglicans in North America), has made the following response:
“I have read the statement from the Archbishop of Canterbury’s office regarding next year’s Lambeth Conference. While the immediate attention is focused on the invitation list, it should be remembered that this crisis in the Anglican Communion is not about a few individual bishops but about a worldwide Communion that is torn at its deepest level. This point was made repeatedly at the Primates’ meeting in Dar es Salaam. Depending on the response of The Episcopal Church to the Primates’ communiqué by September 30, the situation may become even more complex. One thing is clear, a great deal can and will happen before next July.”
CONTACT: Mr. Jim Robb, CANA Media Officer
mobile: 202.285.4390
The Living Church interprets this as Global South Attendance at Lambeth Conference Doubtful.
One has to wonder if this means Nigeria will not come. By the same token, one has to wonder where Uganda and Kenya will be on this. Primates of the Global South Steering Committee have expressed their willingness to forego Lambeth if the circumstances are not to their liking. Will they therefore choose to stay away? I fear in this gamesmanship we have a major game of Chicken. (For those unfamiliar, it is a high-risk game, frequently played with automobiles, to see who will face longest the risk of death by head-on collision, with the first to turn away being… Read more »
I suppose this means that +Minns will get the invite sence we all know that ++Rowan will bend over backwards to keep ++Abuja happy.
If true, good riddance! The ongoing, flagrant aggressiveness of the Nigerians continues to beggar belief. “The Lord bless you as you remain in Christ” My Fat Posterior! The archbishop must surely, finally take a stand this time – that, or forfeit the respect of all parties involved. Akinola & his storm-troopers clearly have precious little for him, when a statement like this is issued in the form of a throw-away email from Tunde.
Well, that’s a good start – now all they have to do is finally start the fundamentalist church they have always wish to see….good riddance
“I suppose this means that +Minns will get the invite since we all know that ++Rowan will bend over backwards to keep ++Abuja happy.”
Do we all know that? It seems some would like us to believe it, but I never have.
Akinola is the liberals’ secret weapon. He never fails to strengthen their hand.
I am in agreement with those who say that the withholding of an invitation from Bp Robinson is an offense to every baptized member of TEC. That having been said, there is a positive side to all this. The ABC in his explanatory material has made it very clear that the Lambeth Conference is a continuing education event for bishops, no more, no less, not a legislative session. We as a church do not really miss out on anything important by not participating. You can interpret an invitation, or lack of same, to mean whatever you want, but when all… Read more »
I, for one, would be sad if the Nigerian bishops stayed away. I understand that there are a large number of Anglicans in Nigeria. It would be sad if their voice were not heard.
Well, we’ve had both sides denounce some omissions, and we’ll see lots more of that in the weeks ahead. After that, I expect that both sides will, at least “provisionally”, accept. I don’t think either wants to be caught in the bind that Marshall suggests by turning away too quickly, and they can always change their minds later. Besides, there is still a lot that can happen between now and then to clarify the situation (i.e., disqualify, dismay, and/or discourage the adversary from attending). Things will stay interesting for many months to come.
Steven
I am profoundly happy to see that US bishops are being invited. It is excellent to see that past injustice put behind us. It is going to be interesting to see who is prepared to sit at the table with who. This is so much like preparing an interfaith wedding. Where to sit the inlaws? Who do we inspect for arms? Who will moderate a table? Who would inflame a table? I promise not to put any of my GLBT friends at the same table as an open arch conservative, but the fussy ones will have to be content sitting… Read more »
Blush
I just scrolled down and saw the past injustice hasn’t been fixed.
Mind you, the comments about the wedding party invitations and seating arrangements still apply.
There are some souls who would be invited that I would be delighted if they refused to attend. But the invitations would be made because it is the right thing to do, not because I like or trust them.
“I, for one, would be sad if the Nigerian bishops stayed away. I understand that there are a large number of Anglicans in Nigeria. It would be sad if their voice were not heard.” — Audrey Audrey, there are also a large number of Anglicans who are LGBT, including in Nigeria. (Admittedly, as in Nigeria, most of these global Anglican LGBTs must stay in the shadows, as their churches are not yet as welcoming as those in the USA, Canada, Brasil, and other countries.) Would it also likewise be sad if *their* voice(s) were not heard at Lambeth, at the… Read more »
Ruidh-
I think if we take the events in Tanzania where the comunique was altered just to keep +Peter in the room, yea I think ++Rowans much more likely to bend for them than anybody.
Indeed – the best approach now would have been to invite them all, and not trying to sift them out in advance.
Who knows whether Akinola will march his troops down again. If he does, wave bye bye (but means he’d be staying)!
Not inviting Robinson is not about Robinson. ECUSA was told that his consecration would tear the fabric of this communion, and so it has. CANA developed as a response to innovations of ECUSA that preceeded Robinson but flow from the same justice centered theology. These are the bitter fruits of that seed, clearly unintended consequences. Robinson and Integrity’s responses seem overly personal, all about him. This is about a worldwide church splintering, much bigger than LGBT alone. And no, all baptised Episcopalians do not see this as an affront. Many, including me, see this as an appropriate response to the… Read more »
I wish the Nigerian Church well, as she moves farther and farther from the life of the Anglican Communion and its member provinces. Who would you say was the latest far right wing mouth piece to profile Akinola? Michael Gerson. http://www.usatoday.com/life/2001-04-11-bush-speechwriter.htm Under such, and many other, equally chilling, circumstances, I wish my Nigerian brothers and sisters well. As for “the need” to do all we can so we may, somehow, help our LGBT brothers and sisters in Nigeria … that is not the only place in the world where LGBT people are, in fact, persecuted, and certainly not the only… Read more »
badman says
“Akinola is the liberals’ secret weapon. He never fails to strengthen their hand.”
……are you sure, badman?
You heard of Dromatine, TWR and Tanzania???
(Depending on what they decide before Sept 30th, the VGR consecrators can also expect to have their invitations withdrawn – unless they genuinely repent)
Yes, NP, I’m sure. Akinola’s impatience and misjudgment become increasingly apparent. Neither quality has served his allies. Dromantine was early on, and his petulant refusal of communion did put others off their stride. He had no hand in the Windsor Report, which was partly directed at border crossers like him. His obstinacy in Tanzania obtained the Primatial Council proposal and the September deadlines. But the Primatial Council overplayed the conservative hand, frightened moderate US Bishops, and prompted rapid rejection by ECUSA, and the invitation to the Archbishop of Canterbury. These setbacks mean there is now no realistic prospect of establishing… Read more »
Not a scrap of evidence for that, NP. In any case, there is nothing to repent for.
Indeed, they should be congratulated for supporting justice and equality as opposed to the institutionalised homophobia of conservative Christianity
Harvard Man commented “Not inviting Robinson is not about Robinson. ECUSA was told that his consecration would tear the fabric of this communion…” Indeed. That has been the focus of my prayers for the last day or so. This Algemeiner article about Ruth has fed those contemplations, in particular the analysis about the Moabites and Lot’s daughters. http://www.algemeiner.com/generic.asp?ID=3447 Back in 2005 a well meaning contributor to the local diocese forum sent a private message asking me if I was okay. My reply at the time included a comment that at some point in history some poor woman was going to… Read more »
harvard man – The organization that you’re so concerned about has officially been called “TEC” for a couple of years now, not “ECUSA”. Frankly, it boggles my mind how anyone can refer to “justice centered theology” as if it’s a bad thing, and is somehow unrelated to preaching Christ’s love. “Tearing of the fabric” is not a consequence of “justice centered theology” but of a clash between liberal and conservative interpretations of the Gospel, both of which have been around for quite some time, both of which can legitimately be called “traditions”. Let’s stop playing the blame game, and let’s… Read more »
harvard man writes: “Many, including me, see this as an appropriate response to the tearing of the communion. VGR’s presence would only tear it further and move focus from the tear to the person.”
So you think it’s OK to tear it further by pre-filtering and omitting some of those who attend Lambeth?
My only problem with having both extremes equally invited (including Robinson) is that it’s the Nigerians who’ll object, and while I would instinctively like to tell them “well get lost, then”, that’s not productive.
I suppose NP, Harvard Man, that you believe homosexuality is a choice? I have taught for 15 years, 10 working with special needs children. How do explain research that says children with Down Syndrome or 2 to 3 times more likely to be homosexual. How do you say to one of these loving children, who by the way really don’t understand why their sexual disorder is so reviled, “your not whole, unloved by God.” Well, your loved only if you abstain from being in a loving relationship (or having sex), something you’d not deny yourselves. Do you have a cure… Read more »
“Tearing the fabric”; “tearing the communion” – the “four legs good, two legs bad”, “Big Lie”, smoke-screen of the Radical Right. Give it a rest, Harvard Man.
“Not inviting Robinson is not about Robinson. ECUSA was told that his consecration would tear the fabric of this communion, and so it has. CANA developed as a response to innovations of ECUSA that preceeded Robinson but flow from the same justice centered theology.” — harvard man harvard man, you have it exactly backward, repeating that favorite old saw of the “reasserters” about how “reappraisers” are driven by Zeitgeist-dictated notions of justice instead of by good, solid theology. Where do you think our (i.e., “reappraisers'”/progressives’) very notions of justice flow from in the first place? It is not that our… Read more »
I agree with Audrey that it would be sad if the Nigerians stayed away. I’m particularly anxious for the voice of Nigerian (and other African) women and gays to be heard, but of course they are not represented amongst their bishops.
“So you think it’s OK to tear it further by pre-filtering and omitting some of those who attend Lambeth?” I’m not sure who you’re talking about here. If it’s VGR, it’s pretty clear that the Windsor Report itself calls for him to not be invited. Look at paragraph 133. If it’s Minns, Murphy and/or Cavalcante, I can certainly see Williams following Carey’s lead and treating Minns as Carey treated Murphy et al. Also, the threat to withdraw invitations seems to be a shot over the bow of Iker, Schofield, Duncan and anyone else who was considering fashioning their own APO… Read more »
Oh, I think its very productive, Tim – the product will be that they will carry out their threat of starting their own premodern, fundamentalist Church of Akinola, and their departure will certainly be something to celebrate
This is an obvious appeasement of Nigeria. Let’s just get that straight for starters. Enough of this mealy-mouthed, Anglican niceness. It is the devil incarnate.
It all reminds me of the beatification of John XXIII. Pius XII was beatified at about the same time. It’s the same situation, only in reverse. I suppose the un-bishop Minns not getting an invitation will make some happy. Not me. It should be Akinola who is not invited, as he’s the manipulative bully who “consecrated him”. STAY HOME, PETEY!
Pius IX, Jennifer – FAR worse!
harvardman,
It’s not really a justice based theology you’re questioning.
I appreciate Cheryl’s references above. Praise God for grace and mercy. But let’s forget a just God calls His people to live holy lives. Redemption was required because God’s people sinned and violated the covenant. God’s justice had to be satisfied.
Justice calls for equality. God has given that – one standard for human conduct and one call to everyone to experience God’s love and redemption through faith in Christ.
Rather, you’re questioning a rights based theology that calls for different standards for different groups of people.
Which one standard for human conduct are you referring to, Chris? The standard where a man was permitted to have multiple wives and concubines, that prevailed for most of the Biblical period, for instance? If so, what larks for straight men I suppose. And which “different standards for different groups of people” are you referring to? If I didn’t know better I’d almost think you were dredging up that old chestnut about homosexuals seeking “special rights”. I’m not seeking the “right” to belong to the Anglican Church. I think we all should regard ourselves as guests at Christ’s table. Unlike… Read more »
badman – I am not sure what evidence you have for stating that the Sept 30 deadline is no longer valid?? Your reading of the situation seems like wishful thinking on your part. When I look at TWR, Dromatine, Tanzania…..I suspect we will see the following: a) ++Akinola’s demand that the consecrators of VGR not be invited because the ABC does not was to see Alexandria 2008 (at the same time as a smaller and much less vibrant Lambeth 2008 with KJS and VGR); b) +Minns may not be invited – this is not a big deal as ++Carey did… Read more »
Chris wrote: “God’s love and redemption through faith in Christ.” Quite a lot has happened to Biblical translations down the ages. Words change content, alien philosophies invade. State, socio-political and ecclesiological agendas transform. As many ancient words pístis = faith has 2 directions. LXX nómos = tradition; means both to pass on something received, and to receive what is passed on. Pístis is either trust i n somebody or something, or faithful-ness/being faith-full t o w a r d s somebody or something. Both are over Time. So when Romans says pístis xristoû, it speaks not of o u r… Read more »
I knew this reminded me of something, and Jennifer got it: Pius IX balanced against John XXIII. But it is very odd that while both bishops are singled out as church-breakers, one allegedly does so in the privacy of his bedroom. Surely it is those who consecrated Gene R. who are the church-breakers, if anyone. The singling out of Gene R. for non-invitation puts the accent in the wrong place — on the very “vital spot” where the entire Global South firmly believe it to belong. Thus the debate lurches back from issues of Church Order to bedroom ones.
What’s with this posted presumptive repeat of that utterly telltale rightwing notion that gay rights=special rights? Alas, doesn’t stand up to even common sense scrutiny – But remains a favorite soundbite mantra of the USA extreme religious right movements. And has sometimes worked in elections and other campaigning. Are such notions a trumpet call to moblize the troops? Or to buttress one’s own presumptions, unquestioned, of having special exclusively heterosexual call to rule, especially over the terribly unruly gays? The accurate summary of the alternative view is that both gays and straights are more or less held to the same… Read more »
NP, NP, NP. It isn’t that the September 30 deadline is “no longer” valid.
The September 30 deadline never was valid.
The foreign prelates gathered in Tanzania never had the authority to set the deadline.
Malcolm – just repeating that Lambeth 1.10 or the Sept 30 deadline are not valid does not make them invalid…..sorry, even the liberal ABC seems to realise that the Anglican disease of never taking deisions or allowing people to flagrantly break agreements does not Christian unity make….a house divided against itself cannot stand and a double-minded AC is simply a recipe for slow death. If you get caught speeding, I would love to hear the excuses you come up with to get the speed cop to let you off! “Officer, this is a not a law I ever agreed with….so… Read more »
NP, Your current analogy, like most of your arguments, is empty fluff. Simply repeating that the Sep 30 deadline is authoritative does not make it so. Unlike you, I have other evidence to point to for my position – including a long history of documentation, including the circular calling the first Lambeth Conference and the resolutions of subsequent Lambeths, which make it crystal clear that Lambeth resolutions do not have the authority you claim. Likewise, the Primates Meeting has never had the authority you and others have creatively made up for it in the past two years. You really are… Read more »
Malcolm,
You are of course right that the bodies in question do not have the authority some people attribute to them.
But it is also true that bullies, throughout the ages, have simply ignored legal realities and forcefully created new ones.
There is a sense in which repeating false arguments can contribute to an increasing sense of fear until those in the centre panic into making concessions they do not need to make. The middle ground then continues to shift, bit by bit, until a new political reality has been created. Legal adjustments follow afterwards.
Erica, I think you have correctly identified the dishonest tactic of the “conservatives.” Note that NP simply states over and over again that the arbitrary deadline from Dar has authority.
Clearly they hope that the rest of the Communion will give in to them on this – as we foolishly did about Canadian and American participation at the last ACC meeting. Of course, once we give in, the “conservatives” have their legal precedent.
Malcolm – you do realise that ALL the Primates (including KJS from TEC) issued the Tanzania Communique?? I know KJS has Griswoldian skills in being able to agree and disagree with something at the same time but it is a fact that ALL the Archbishops issues the Communique and there was no minority report. You seem confused…..but please be clear, The Tanzania Communique was not issued by nasty conservatives but by ALL the Primates of the AC- & the Sept 30 deadline for an umabiguous response from TEC was given by them……I guess you hope that the deadline will pass… Read more »
The only one confused, NP, is you. The issue is not who signed the document. Never was. The issue is this – Do the Primates have the authority to take juridical decisions, to set demands and to establish deadlines for the autocephalous provinces of the Communion. When the Primates Meeting was first called together in the 1970s, it was expressly set forth that the body had no juridical functions. In fact, no one even pretended that the body had such functions until the coup d’etat at Dromantine. You are no “reasserter,” NP. You are a revisionist, pure and simple –… Read more »
Malcolm, no Primate signed the Tanzania Communique but they all stood up and said they agreed with it….and most of them understood that to mean that….they agreed with it. I gues you would have argued that the ABC could not possibly not invite VGR to Lambether 2008? Or maybe you would have said that was his preorogative? I gues you would have argued that the ABC and AC could not possibly have asked TEC and Canada to withdraw from AC councils…..but they did. In October, when we have TEC’s response to the deadline, we will see how wrong you are… Read more »
“but I suspect that Rowan flying in to see TEC bishops at the end of Sept will result in a fudge “
Is this the humble beginning of the realisation that there won’t be a firework of expulsion?
no Erika – just watching Rowan with J John or Rowan with the Canadians, he has an ability to get liberals to bend to his will as he seeks to keep the AC together
So it was a different NP who confidently posted a couple of days ago:
“Tobias – when Rowan says in October that the TEC bishops involved in “consecrating” VGR are uninvited, I look forward to hearing your spin on that too….”?
NP – “no Primate signed the Tanzania Communique but they all stood up and said they agreed with it.” M – Irrelevant. The Primates do not have the authority, individually or collectively, to make demands, to set deadlines or to enforce either. They could all have agreed that their wind smelled like roses – it wouldn’t have made it so. NP – “I gues you would have argued that the ABC could not possibly not invite VGR to Lambether 2008? Or maybe you would have said that was his preorogative?” M – Given that Colenso wasn’t invited to the first… Read more »
Malcolm – please get over this obsession with ++Akinola……
Please recognise that Lambeth resoluitions were not made by ++Akinola alone and that ALL (surprisingly!) the Primates of the AC sent out the Tanzania Communique.
Also, I know of no AC communiques etc sparked by ++Akinola or +Duncan deliberately tearing the fabric of the Communion, do you??
If there is a split, you are seriously deluded (given the above) in hoping that most of the AC is going to accept VGR…….but, as I say, pls get over this ++Akinola obsession because it is clouding your judgment.
NP – Please stop this fabrication that my issue is with the Prince Bishop of Abuja. The issue has to do with what authority Lambeth has and what authority the Primates meeting has. I am quite certain you are not as stupid as you are trying to let on. I am quite certain that you actually do understand the point I am making and the fact that it has two-thirds of four-fifths of bugger-all to do with the individual person of the Prince Bishop of Abuja. But since you cannot make a case that either Lambeth or the Primates Meeting… Read more »