Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Improve the Covenant!

The final statement of the 2nd All Africa Bishops Conference is published (H/T Thinking Anglicans). More than a Via Media offers an excellent reflection on it here.

I simply draw attention to two statements. One about the Covenant. The other about Anglican voices.

"5. Whereas we accept the rationale for an Anglican Covenant, we realise the need for further improvement of the Covenant in order to be an effective tool for unity and mutual accountability.


7. While we will always be prepared to listen to voices from other parts of the global Communion, it is pertinent that the rest of the world listens to the unique voice of the Churches in Africa. In this context, the Anglican Churches in Africa commit itself to a renewed engagement in global mission, recognising that in the 21st Century mission goes from ‘everywhere to anywhere.’ "

In other words, that final draft is not the final draft of a Covenant which is going to be agreed to by Africa. And the final final draft, if agreed to by Africa is unlikely to be agreeable to TEC. As well, the continued interchange of support, networking, and fellowship between African Anglican churches and ACNA and AMiA will continue.

Oh, and just in case anyone is wondering about the significance of Archbishop Bob Duncan being present at the conference, note this:

"Our meeting was honoured with the presence of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the head of the Anglican Communion, The Most Rev. and Rt. Hon. Dr. Rowan Williams; the Chairman of the Global South, the Most Reverend Dr John Chew (Primate of South East Asia) and the Most Rev Bob Duncan, Archbishop of the Anglican Church in North America."

Difficult to see this group of bishops heading to Lambeth 2018 without their colleague coming too ...

So I think we can expect some pretty serious discussion at the Primates Meeting in January about the Covenant. African drums are beating for change.

11 comments:

David |Dah • veed| said...

These folks, or their predecessors, have held conferences before. They have issued communiqu├ęs, white papers, edicts, proclamations and ultimatums before. Nothing has come of the intentions proclaimed loudly before. How is this time different? How is this big bag of hot air different? I cannot see that it is. I doubt that any more will come of this conference than has come of the conferences that they have held before.

Nothing much has changed in Africa. Different dictators. Different corrupt administrations. Different Anglican prelates in the pockets of corrupt officials. But the same extreme poverty, famine, drought and war. The same abuse of women, children and powerless men. The same drainage of the continent's resources by corrupt corporations and individuals. Just on a bit larger scale than the past.

I doubt that it was important to the woman in the Sudan who left her encampment yesterday looking for wood for fuel who was attacked, raped and then abandoned by her husband because he was now ashamed to have her as his wife, that 400 African prelates spent millions of dollars to be feted and cheer led in Uganda.

That example could be repeated 10000 times over for every African nation with Anglican bishops who went to Uganda. This conference did nothing for them.

And if this conference was not paid for by outside sources, which makes these prelates little more than puppets on strings in many ways, then it is damnable blasphemy in God's eyes that internal funds should be diverted for the high class enjoyment of this self-important few.

You can follow the Yellow Brick Road south Peter. I seriously doubt that it goes anywhere.

Peter Carrell said...

Hmm, David, what you say is pretty tough on Africans.

Any conference I go to is long on rhetoric and short on transformation, but I am always hopeful that bit by bit our meetings contribute to transformation. Meanwhile it always remains true that the money spent on my airfares and accommodation could have been used for something else, including feeding the world's hungry. Are we all around the world going to stop going to conferences, or just ask Africans to do so?

David |Dah • veed| said...

I live in a developing country Peter. A poor country inflicted with poverty, corruption and immersed in a horrendous drug war that has taken thousands of lives over the last four years. The Anglican Church of Mexico does not have expensive multimillion dollar conferences. We have modest events in inexpensive locations. And most folks get to them by bus.

Peter Carrell said...

Hi David,
I imagine that when Anglicans in Tanzania or Nigeria have a conference there is a lot of bus travel, if not walking to get to the venue.

The All Africa Bishops conference last met, I believe, in 2004. The question could be whether it is unreasonable for African bishops to get together at six yearly intervals for meetings. The answer might be that it is unreasonable. But it would be good to have that assessment coming from Africa as much as from those of us who live outside of Africa.

David |Dah • veed| said...

Peter, if the Africans restrained themselves to Africa I would be inclined to probably agree with you. But since what we have here are Africans sitting in judgement of Anglicans in other parts of the world, I think that they naively open themselves up to justifiable outside criticism.

Not only are they sitting in judgement of others, but they are crowing to the rooftops presently that now is the time they have come into their own and the world need look to them, to the Church in Africa, and heed their judgement.

You Anglophiles have a saying; "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones." These proud and haughty African prelates live in very fragile glass houses. They need to stop throwing stones.

Peter Carrell said...

I can agree with you, David, that it is not good to throw stones!

David |Dah • veed| said...

Just an idea for you Peter. Run the documents issued from the CAPA conference through your word processing program with spell check active. If you start seeing your spell check pick up Statesonian English spellings then you start getting some evidence that the African bishop's Statesonian handlers are at play.

Also, it is interesting that the Primates of CAPA document was not signed by any primates. So it gives the impression that it came from all of them. There is now evidence arising that that is not the case. Nor does it seem that all of the African provinces stand together when it comes to Africa meddling in the affairs of other Anglican provinces.

The Lead has put up a letter that is reported to come from bishops in the provinces of Central and Southern Africa. They state that they do not appreciate being handled by schismatic former Anglicans railroading the CAPA conference, that was to be about Africa, to being about the schismatic's issues of trying to replace and destroy TEC in the AC.

http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/anglican_communion/an_end_to_the_myth_of_a_monoli.html

Peter Carrell said...

Hi David,
The spellcheck test would only confirm that the computer being used to type up the documents employed the US English version of the word processor.

I am aware of Episcopal Cafe's posting of the allegation of mischief making by North American Anglicans.

I am not myself inclined to believe that the mighty Anglican church of Africa is a pawn in the hands of ++Bob Duncan and co. I am inclined to believe that African Anglican bishops understand the controversies in North America and have varying degrees among them of support for one side or another. It is no surprise, for instance, that the Anglican Church of Southern Africa is not precisely on the same page as most other Anglican African churches: that has been so for a long time now.

David |Dah • veed| said...

This appears to be a conversation between you and me. We have not managed to draw anyone else into the discussion.

I am not as familiar with PCs Peter. I have used Macs since 1984, the first. For Macs there are no US versions of a program. In the system prefs you set your location and cultural standards which would globally set for all apps. That would then use the resources in the app for your corresponding location. If I set my Mac for New Zealand then it would automatically draw on a New Zealand or Australian, or at minimum a UK dictionary to check my documents. These dictionaries are built into the Mac OS X Operating System. I ran the CAPA docs and only found fiber, instead of fibre. This is how we have found evidence of schismatic Statesonian hands in the pot in the past, which got folks looking into the meta data in the Word files, which led us to Martin Minns and company feeding their issues into past documents from "Africans." Such as the infamous Primates Meeting in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, where certain African primates kept running back to the rooms where Martin Minns, Robert Duncan and their minor minions were holed up writing the documents. The other thing to examine is the rather modern idiomatic and polished First World English of the recently issued CAPA documents, as compared to the rather stilted, secondary level of English used on the websites of these same African provinces.

So then the question comes down to why the CAPA folks would be typing their docs on a Statesonian's computer. I know with all of your heart you wish to believe that the Africans are not being handled. But if the letter from the Central and Southern provinces is legit, then a number of bishops at this CAPA conference felt that they were being ambushed by schismatics and resented attempts at being manipulated as pawns in ACNA's games. There is also plenty of evidence from past meetings that individual bishops have been threatened with following the company line of their province or be deposed and forsake your home and pension. We have the testimony of a number of African bishops who had to quietly attend the most recent Lambeth Conference.

I do not trust an African archbishop as far as I could throw him! But you had surmised that I know.

David |Dah • veed| said...

Part One -

This appears to be a conversation between you and me. We have not managed to draw anyone else into the discussion.

I am not as familiar with PCs Peter. I have used Macs since 1984, the first. For Macs there are no US versions of a program. In the system prefs you set your location and cultural standards which would globally set for all apps. That would then use the resources in the app for your corresponding location. If I set my Mac for New Zealand then it would automatically draw on a New Zealand or Australian, or at minimum a UK dictionary to check my documents. These dictionaries are built into the Mac OS X Operating System. I ran the CAPA docs and only found fiber, instead of fibre. This is how we have found evidence of schismatic Statesonian hands in the pot in the past, which got folks looking into the meta data in the Word files, which led us to Martin Minns and company feeding their issues into past documents from "Africans." Such as the infamous Primates Meeting in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, where certain African primates kept running back to the rooms where Martin Minns, Robert Duncan and their minor minions were holed up writing the documents. The other thing to examine is the rather modern idiomatic and polished First World English of the recently issued CAPA documents, as compared to the rather stilted, secondary level of English used on the websites of these same African provinces.

David |Dah • veed| said...

Part Two -

So then the question comes down to why the CAPA folks would be typing their docs on a Statesonian's computer. I know with all of your heart you wish to believe that the Africans are not being handled. But if the letter from the Central and Southern provinces is legit, then a number of bishops at this CAPA conference felt that they were being ambushed by schismatics and resented attempts at being manipulated as pawns in ACNA's games. There is also plenty of evidence from past meetings that individual bishops have been threatened with following the company line of their province or be deposed and forsake your home and pension. We have the testimony of a number of African bishops who had to quietly attend the most recent Lambeth Conference.

I do not trust an African archbishop as far as I could throw him! But you had surmised that I know.