GAFCON organizers meeting in Jerusalem next week
The news about GAFCON is starting to be covered in more and more venues. The Australian newspaper, The Age has coverage from a local angle that highlights the role of the Archbishop of Sydney.
Archbishop Jensen is planning on traveling to Jerusalem next week and hopes that he and Archbishop Akinola, the primary organizers of the meeting will have a chance to meet with the Bishop of Jerusalem:
"Outspoken Anglican Archbishop Peter Jensen is galvanising opposition to homosexuality in the church, in the lead-up to an unofficial meeting of conservative bishops in Jerusalem.As rifts in the worldwide Anglican Church threaten to become a schism, the Sydney Archbishop said American Anglicans had become missionaries for homosexuality in defiance of the Bible and Anglican teaching.
...Dr Jensen, the main Western leader of the conservative evangelical strand, said he hoped to meet Bishop Dawani in Jerusalem next week. Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola, the other main conservative Anglican leader, will be there too."
Read the rest here.
There is additional coverage in "The Australian" that mentions the local opposition to Archbishop Jensen's actions:
"Moderate voices in the Australian Anglican Church yesterday criticised the decision to hold a separate conference, which some see as a challenge to the authority of the Lambeth Conference.Anglican Bishop Tom Frame, the director of St Mark's National Theological Centre in Canberra and head of the School of Theology at Charles Sturt University, said: "It can only be construed as a provocative gesture. Any international gathering of only part of the Anglican Communion might suggest, in the minds of some, that an alternative force to the Anglican conference is coming in to existence.""
(From here.)
Akinola has first hand knowledge of what a tenderbox tensions between Christians and Muslims can be from his experience in Nigeria. He knows well enough it requires great diplomacy. It makes you wonder what calculus he used to determine that it was worthwhile to bring trouble to Jerusalem - what cost and benefits did he include and which did he ignore? And whose concerns did he discount?
To quote Andrew Brown,
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/andrew_brown/2008/01/over_the_last_few_years.html
Akinola has responded to Darwani with a letter that tells him, after several paragraphs of God flannel, to shut up and do what he is told: "Be assured that we considered your important arguments carefully as we met in Nairobi. But we came to the unanimous conclusion that we needed to proceed."
This style does much to explain why some of his followers are backing away from his confrontational tactics. The leaders of the church in south-east Asia are certainly anti-gay, and unenthusiastic about Muslims. But they don't like being pushed around, either, and the last straw came when one of their theologians received an angry email from Akinola which appeared to have been drafted by one of the Archbishop's conservative American advisers, whom he has rewarded with a bishopric.
Posted by John B. Chilton![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/nav-commenters.gif)
|
January 4, 2008 9:47 AM
It causes me to wonder about Australian polity. How might General Synod respond to something not unlike Bishop Duncan's efforts to create a new province in North America?
As we watch GAFCON move further, I think there's more out there to ask about. T19 points to something at Anglican Mainstream that prompts me to ask "What did the Archbishop know, and when did he know it?" It appears he was asked about a possible conservative gathering on December 19, a week or so before the GAFCON press release.
Marshall Scott
Posted by mscottsail![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/nav-commenters.gif)
|
January 4, 2008 1:00 PM