The view from Nigeria
Archbishop Peter Akinola has given an interview to The Guardian newspaper in Nigeria, which portrays him as "a lone voice in the crusade against the attempt to re-write the scripture by some Anglicans in Europe and South America, with the admission of people who practise homosexuals as priests and even bishops in the church." Readers accustomed to seeing Akinola playing to a Western audience through the filter of Martyn Minns, will find these unfiltered remarks, playing to a Nigerian audience, enlightening. This one in particular:
We cannot say that we are in a communion and allow whatever they say to just go like that. Let me also say this: that in our human existence in this world, there was a time Africans were slaves; but we came out of it. But what again followed? Political slavery, under colonial administration. Somehow, we came out of it. Then economic slavery: World Bank, IMF would tell you what to do with your money and your own resources. Now, it is spiritual slavery and we have to resist this. They had us as human slaves, political slaves and economic slaves. They want to come for spiritual slaves. Now we won't accept it.
Episcope has pointed out that the archbishop seems not to have an especially firm grip on certain facts.
This is a fascinating comment for several points. First, I'm fascinated by the great length Archbishop Akinola goes to in explaining the limitations of Lambeth Conferences, and the limitations of Lambeth's authority in speaking to autonomous provinces.
Second, it becomes clear that the Archbishop's concern is as much about American "cultural imperialism" as it is about the actions of the Episcopal Church. To write off the discussions of the past generation within the Episcopal Church as capitulation to a permissive culture is disingenuous at best, since I know he's not simply ignorant.
Third, and as a corollary, the concept of "spiritual slavery" is simply bizarre. All that the Episcopal Church has asked is respect for the culture within which we preach the Gospel, just as we seek to respect the cultures in which he and others work. He acknowledges that the Episcopal Church and other Anglican churches in "the West" function as minorities, with no control of the cultures around us. How then can we be blamed for "imperialism" or efforts at "spiritual slavery" by a culture we do not control? He has ignored our efforts to challenge our own culture, because we have not challenged the issue of critical importance to him in the way he would wish.
Marshall Scott
Posted by mscottsail![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/nav-commenters.gif)
|
July 30, 2007 1:59 PM
It's clearly & sadly apparent [to those in the "Global North" who've been on the receiving end of Akinola's willful & deliberate insults, as opposed to being in the "fortunate" (?) position of having certain facts conveniently covered over for them] that ++Abuja is doing what he always does, i.e., playing to the crowd. I have to agree with Marshall+ that some of his reasoning is "simply bizarre." I don't know about any of you, but *I* surely haven't seen any evidence of TEC telling either PA OR his parishioners what they can/cannot, may/MAY not do in their province. (The reverse corollary of that need not be spoken, of course, since it's so patently blatant.)
I fully expect the snake oil (apologies to Fr. Jake, naturally!) it to be effective with the target population, not because they're "simple children in need of guidance" (to use a term commonly applicable to the colonialists Akinola is so down on), but because he exercises oh-so-careful selectivity when it comes to giving them the gospel, in other words, The Truth. :(
Posted by bill nichols![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/nav-commenters.gif)
|
July 30, 2007 6:02 PM