Bishop Bill Atwood, AC-NA and Anglican Church of Kenya Suffragan Bishop for International Affairs, has written the "message" for the weekly American Anglican Council email newsletter. He had this to say about some churches in the "global south" and why they were not at the Global South Encounter #4 in Singapore. He cites several different uses of the term "global south." He then says:
"The third way that the term "Global South" is used is a doctrinal one. As the influence of the Episcopal Church has spread, a number of provinces that are located below the 20º northern parallel have adopted TEC's doctrinal postion. A number of them are both dependent and responsive to financial support from TEC. Some of those provinces are quite small. Mexico, for example, has fewer members in its province than there are in the youth group at All Saints Cathedral in Nairobi, Kenya. This becomes an issue in the structures of the Anglican Communion where Mexico has an equal voice with Nigeria (20 million), Uganda (10 million), or Kenya (5+million). For those who decry this reality and say, "It is not about numbers!" let me point out that numbers of "votes" are still used in decision making in the current structures; the numbers are just not at all representative.
Many of the Anglicans who live geographically in the "Global South" do not include the theologically liberal provinces in their thinking when they use the term. This application of "Global South" implies doctrinal fidelity to Scripture and "the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints." Fidelity to the historic Anglican formularies is actually the point around which GAFCON (now the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans or FCA) gathered originally. It is how people of like faith are being incorporated into fellowship and mission cooperation regardless of where they live".
OK, Bishop Bill. It IS about numbers... out there in the upper reaches of Anglican Land. And the reason why you don't want Mexico to be equally represented with Kenya is because you believe Mexico is (gasp) liberal or worse yet (double gasp) bought lock stock and barrel by TEC. I presume you don't have problems with the Province of the Southern Cone, whose primate is not Latin American and whose total numbers are about the that of a modest diocese in England. You don't have problems with that because their missionary funding comes from SAMS UK and SAMS USA and like minded organizations. I presume you don't have any problems with the Diocese in Jerusalem, part of the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East.. but no wait, they get lots of their funding from suspect sources, and they are very small in size.
No, Bishop Bill, you are insulting Mexico, IARCA, Brazil, Province Nine in TEC, and probably others by suggesting that they have been bought. And it is about numbers. Mexico, IARCA and Brazil get to vote in Primates meetings and at ACC.
You say they "are both dependent and responsive to financial support from TEC", by which you mean they have been bribed by missionary support to support TEC. So apparently you fear that they are going to vote with TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada and other western ideologues whenever asked. That is a lie and insulting to boot.
Provinces and even dioceses within TEC from the Global South have their own minds and views and they sometimes do not match the supposed liberal minds and views of the majority of TEC.
When Puerto Rico, which had been independent for some years from TEC, asked to be readmitted into union with TEC two extraordinary things happened: (i) their admission occurred at a time when their vote would probably be counted with the traditionalist and conservatives and against "progressive" legislation. It was argued that they ought not be admitted then, but later. Dr. Louie Crew, among others, argued strongly for their admission without reference to their stance on issues. His wisdom prevailed. (ii) At the same time they came ready to bear their portion of the program and mission load, and have done so since.
The Province of Brazil (the Igreja Episcopal Anglicana do Brasil) (IEAB) became independent as a province in 1965 and by 1975 was receiving no regular funds from TEC. It has been its own master for 35 years and it is an insult to consider them beholden to TEC.
IARCA has its own voice and its leadership has varied in its support of TEC.
Member dioceses of TEC in the ninth province rather regularly vote in the minority on matters of interest to Bishop Bill's cadre in the "Global South."
Bishop Bill insults churches and Provinces in the Global South with the abandon that arises from an arrogance that is quite remarkable. Some Global South Provinces, who were by the way invited to the first and (I believe) the second GS Encounter, have been dis-invited. Bishop Atwood is right to suggest that this is because GSE and the GAFCON / FOCA group has forced the issue of theological purity.
Fine, be pure and exclude parts of the Global South, and include some pasty white guys in fancy clothes from the north, some rich first world folk from South East Asia and some ecclesiastical ex-pats, bishops in two places at once - ACNA and Kenya - just in case one of those doesn't work out. Fine.
But I can't help noticing that there are (gasp) liberals, (gasp) independents, and yes (gasp) gay and lesbian folk and fellow travelers every where in the Anglican world. I'm sure Bishop Atwood will be glad to explain how all of those are going to be rooted out of GSE and GAFCON / FOCA. Then I am sure he will be able to explain just why one day he might also be rooted out and bounced. After all, he is first world, white, and tarred with the cultural liberal brush of decedent western imperialism. It's in the air.
This application of "Global South" implies doctrinal fidelity to Scripture and "the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints." Fidelity to the historic Anglican formularies is actually the point around which GAFCON (now the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans or FCA) gathered originally. It is how people of like faith are being incorporated into fellowship and mission cooperation regardless of where they live".ReplyDelete
So why call themselves "Global South" at all? (If you don't have to live there, and it's certainly not where their money comes from?)
My guess: they decided on the term "Global South" because of the credibility and admirability this term gained from the Liberation Theology that the GAFCONian FOCAs reject!
They are milking the cred of Gutierrez, and Boff, and Helder Camara, and Steve Biko, and Desmond Tutu (among others) . . . and then turning around and p*ssing on the legacy (if not person) of the actual people who INVENTED the (Liberation) concept "Global South"! Hypocrites! >:-0
I hear a saying in English is that it is better to remain silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.ReplyDelete
The primates speak to one another as equals. But they have no authority so they do not vote on anything. They supposedly come to a consensus on their opinions.
The only entity that has authority is the Anglican Consultative Council. The provinces are not represented equally in this body.
From the Wikipedia;
The largest provinces are entitled to appoint three representatives, consisting of one bishop, one priest, and one layperson.
For the purposes of apportioning the membership on the Anglican Consultative Council, the large provinces are considered to be:
Anglican Church of Australia
Anglican Church of Canada
Church of England
Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion)
Church of the Province of Rwanda
Church of the Province of Southern Africa
Church of South India
Anglican Church of Tanzania
Church of the Province of Uganda
Episcopal Church (United States of America)
The smallest provinces appoint only one person, preferably from among the laity.
The smallest provinces include:
Church of Bangladesh
Episcopal Anglican Church of Brasil
Church of the Province of Burundi
Anglican Church of the Central America Region
Church of Ceylon
Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui
Church of the Province of the Indian Ocean
Nippon Sei Ko Kai (Anglican Communion in Japan)
Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East
Anglican Church in Korea
Church of the Province of Melanesia
Anglican Church of Mexico
Church of the Province of Myanmar
Anglican Church of Papua New Guinea
Episcopal Church in the Philippines
Anglican Church of the Southern Cone of America
Scottish Episcopal Church
Church of the Province of Southeast Asia
Church of the Province of West Africa
This will come as a shock to Bp. Atwood, but the bishops of Mexico have functional brains. The know or could easily find out that IRD inter alia has lots of cash. If they were for sale, there are available johns to pay. So tell us all, Bishop, who is really whoring here -- could you have gotten that pink shirt in TEC?ReplyDelete
He's not just insulting the Global South by suggesting they can be bought. He's insulting the Episcopal Church, Anglican Church of Canada and perhaps others by suggesting that they would bribe others.ReplyDelete
Don't go away mad, just go away.
Well, if it is about numbers, then, what about the small dioceses within TEC (Quincy et all)?ReplyDelete
And what is the size of "Kenya in the US"?
The problem is that when people start discussing proportional representation, it always ends up in, "Yes, but NIMBY!"