Monday, July 03, 2006

The Anglican Theater of the Absurd

Well, with this latest article from Archbishop Peter Jasper Akinola, Primate of Nigeria, appended below, we have now officially entered the Anglican Theater of the Absurd.

First, the last minute, last ditch effort to get us invited to Lambeth in 2008 by calling a Joint Session of House of Bishops and Deputies and then sending the Presiding Bishop Elect just before the House of Deputies vote to twist our arms even further (the tea and crumpets must be exquisite, they come at such a high cost).

Then, +++Rowan says, "Hmmmm . . . maybe, maybe not," and, as we dangle in the wind for a while, he floats his "Covenant" plan, which is no more than an Anglican Communion-wide "Upstairs/Downstairs" maid arrangement the British are so good at devising - which is really designed to keep the British in firm control.

Then, some of the African bishops, meeting in Kampala, in a letter demonstrating amazing restraint, say, "Thank you. Don't call us, we'll call you."

Now, with this missive, Akinola not only rejects +++Rowan's plan (clearly seeing it for what it is), but produces a final, new, all-time low blow (he must be taking lessons from David Virtue) and calls the Episcopal Church a "cancerous lump in the body."

But wait, there's more!

Akinola, who professes to know EVERYTHING about being Evangelical and Conservative and Orthodox and (like Pat Robertson) CHRISTIAN (for goodness sake!) is brash and arrogant enough to tell the flippin' ARCHBISHOP OF flippin' CANTERBURY what it means to be an "authentic" Anglican!

You just can't make this stuff up!

I note, however, that Sunday's New York Times article by Laurie Goodstein, carried the headline: "Episcopalians Shaken by Division."

Are you kidding me?

Episcopalians 'shaken'?

Never!

Like a good Episcopal martini, we are stirred, but never shaken!

We may be a "cancerous lump" but we do know enough not to bruise the gin.

I don't know about you, but I'm just sorry that, after the history of this time in the life of the church is written, I probably won't be around to see the movie version.

My vote is to let the guys at Montey Pythons' Circus to have at it. The updated version of their classic swipe on Christianity, "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life," should prove to be hysterical.

Here's the latest missive from Akinola.

(Samuel L. Jackson would get my vote to play his role. Can't you just hear his roar? Ben Kinglsey should play +++Rowan - he does complex but dignified suffering so well. Merle Streep should play ++Katharine - because, well, like Katharine, she's simply the best there is. Michael Cain should play ++Frank, although Clark Gable would have gotten serious consideration. Can't you just hear him saying to ++Katharine, "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn." I should stop now. I'm already limp with laughter. Besides, I have no doubt that the comment section will be jam-packed with casting suggestions.)



CONSERVATIVES REJECT ANGLICAN GAY PEACE PLAN
by The Associated Press
July 3, 2006 - 3:00 pm ET

http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/07/070306anglican.htm

(New York City) Africa's largest Anglican church is criticizing a proposal
from the archbishop of Canterbury for two-tier membership in the global
Anglican fellowship, a plan aimed at keeping the group together despite differences
over homosexuality and the Bible. The bishops who lead the 17.5 million-member Church of Nigeria announced their stand in postings Sunday on a pair of Anglican Web sites.

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams _ Anglicanism's spiritual leader _
suggested last month that two levels of participation for the 38 branches of
the Anglican Communion could be created. Under that system, America's
Episcopal Church, which consecrated an openly gay bishop in 2003, would accept a
lesser role to prevent a total break with a majority of Anglican churches, which
are conservative.

The Nigerian bishops said Williams' "brilliant" concept sought to "preserve
the unity of the church by accommodating every shred of opinion no matter how
biblical, all because we want to make everyone feel at home."

But the Nigerians also indicated that total exclusion of the Episcopal Church may be
required: "A cancerous lump in the body should be excised if it has defied every
known cure. To attempt to condition the whole body to accommodate it will lead
to the avoidable death of the patient."

The statement depicted the Williams plan as a "novel" design that's "elastic enough to accommodate all the extremes of preferred modes of expression of the same faith." Instead, it said, Williams should urge churches that chose to "walk apart" to return to authentic Anglicanism.

The Nigerians' statement is particularly noteworthy because their church is
the biggest Anglican denomination outside the Church of England and is often
seen as a leader among Anglican provinces in the developing world.

In a related move, Nigeria's church plans to consecrate Canon Martyn Minns, rector of a prominent conservative parish in Fairfax, Va., as its bishop to lead a
United States mission that serves Nigerians in America and others dissatisfied
with the New York-based Episcopal Church.

Meanwhile, six dioceses unhappy with the Episcopalians' rejection last month
of an outright moratorium on consecrating more gay bishops have asked
Williams for oversight from a bishop outside the Episcopal hierarchy.

Integrity, the caucus for gay and lesbian Episcopalians, released a weekend
statement that expressed frustration with the Anglican wrangling over gay
issues.

"We cannot live up to our call to be the body of Christ in the world if
we're spending all our time, energy and resources arguing about how to be the
Episcopal Church in the Anglican Communion" over the next few years, it
said.

Integrity said the discussion provoked by Williams should include calling
Anglicanism "to account for 30 years of failure to implement an authentic
listening process" on the gay issue.

5 comments:

  1. Some of us, even on the conserving side of this issue, think that ++Akinola's comment about a "cancerous lump" was way beyond the pale.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think poor EW-3 is confused. Period.

    S/he'll write soon and tell me that I'm unkind and insinuate something about the deficiency of the nature and character of my priesthood or challenge the basic integrity of my personhood.

    Or, perhaps s/he'll just post another long piece of . . .ahem, "information" . . . from +PJA's website - as if that will really make a difference - or that anyone will actually read it.

    You can do these things, you see, when you are slinging mud and throwing pebbles anonymously from behind a wall.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It seemed to me from +++Cantuar's "Reflection" that there was no real "Upstairs, Downstairs" status in the Communion, but rather "in the Communion" and "ecumenical friends" like the Methodists (whom he specifically mentioned) and (presumably) Presbyterians, Lutherans, and so on.

    If this interpretation is correct, both the Church of Nigeria and a large number of Episcopal bloggers on both sides of the divide have misinterpreted +++Rowan's message, which was "you are either in or out", depending, basically, on your official acceptance of traditional moral teaching of the Church catholic.

    This seems fair enough to me, Elizabeth, particularly since Windsor begged and pleaded with ECUSA to provide a firm theological argument for its position and the best it could come up with was the risible To Set Our Hope.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Elizabeth, if you're looking for casting recommendations, I nominate Akinola for the leading role in The Madness of Pope Peter.

    This statement of his is so far beyond the pale that I am astonished anyone can listen to him without giggling anymore.

    Thanks for your commentary on this pompous self-righteousness.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think that ++Akinola's reference to those in who do not share his theological views to a "cancerous lump" reflects a manifestation of a challenging manner of life; one of arrogance, spite and disdain. His statement wasn't made to be helpful. It was made to hurt, to fuel the fire, to divide.

    ReplyDelete

Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of this online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by the Blog Owner and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

(With thanks to Sojourners)