Thinking about the GAFCON Statement, Part Two

In Ap. Peter Akinola's opening address, he laid out a reason for why we were gathering. One of the most poignant was his sense of betrayal by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams. Speaking as a spokesperson for the Global South bishops he said, "Lambeth authorities are not willing to listen." Why such a strong statement? The leaders of the Global South feel roundly and routinely ignored. The Windsor Report was repudiated and its recommendations dismissed as TEC (the Episcopal Church) and the ACC (Anglican Church of Canada) continued to move forward with blessing same sex unions and offered no repentance for consecrating Gene Robinson. To this, Ap. Williams made little or no public comment. Bishops in the U.S. publicly derided any idea of an Anglican Covenant and little to no response was forthcoming from Lambeth Palace. Then, (to quote again Ap. Akinola):

"The last major meeting that considered this issue was the Primates Meeting in Tanzania in February 2007. After long and painful hours of deliberations the primates gave TEC a last chance to clarify unequivocally and adequately their stand by 30th September, 2007. Strangely, BEFORE that deadline, and BEFORE the Primates could get the opportunity of meeting to assess the adequacy of the response of TEC, and in a clear demonstration of an unwillingness to follow through our collective decisions....Lambeth Palace in July 2007 issued invitations to TEC bishops including those who consecrated Gene Robinson to attend the Lambeth 2008 conference. At this point, it dawned on us, regrettably, that the Archbishop of Canterbury was not interested in what matters to us, and in what we think or say." When Ap. Akinola made that statement in his speech, a murmur of agreement went through the crowd.

This is the crucial information behind the accusation in the GAFCON statement that, presently, states that the Anglican Communion of still being "a global Communion with a colonial structure." When the majority of the Communion has the distinct impression of being ignored in favor of a tiny but rich and rebellious white minority, then it is only a matter of time before the credibility and the integrity of that leadership is called into question. This is especially true when that leadership acts in ways that are in conflict with the historic theological underpinnings of Anglicanism. No wonder the statement expresses the desire to be a part of a structure that is "more representative of the demographic distribution of global Anglicanism today" and is "stronger as an instrument of effective mission, ministry and social involvement."

It may be considered extreme to "not accept that Anglican identity is determined necessarily through recognition by the Archbishop of Canterbury;" but what are these global south leaders to do when it is a fact that there has been a "manifest failure of the Communion Instruments to exercise discipline in the face of overt heterodoxy"? Is there an alternative method of calling these Communion Instruements to account for failing to guard the unity of the Communion and uphold the clear teaching of the Gospel?

However, as sympathetic as I am to the consensus reached at this historic meeting, that does not mean that there are not real dangers. Any reform movement can move, far too easily, from a commitment to "upholding the Gospel" to upholding their interpretation of the Gospel. In other words, reform can move quickly into sectarianism. Presently three things mitigate against this:

1. GAFCON's cooperative international consensus.
2. GAFCON's stated commitmnet to return to Anglicanism's historic roots
3. GAFCON's willingness to prevent women's ordination from being a cause for disunity.

That said, none of these features guarantee that the "bright future" of Anglicanism will not devolve into just another protestant sect. Indeed, given present day Anglicanism's extreme theological laxity, a long swing of the pendulum too far in the opposite direction will have to be scrupulously avoided. The catholic nature of Anglicanism is at stake.