Support the Café

Search our Site

Wabukala – Did he or didn’t he change his mind?

Wabukala – Did he or didn’t he change his mind?

Curiouser and curiouser out of Kenya in the past few days. A few days ago a letter dated April 4 appeared on the Anglican Church of Kenya website. (It has since been taken down: it is available here.) In that letter, signed by Archbishop Wabukala, he explains that he has reversed his own decision that Kenya would not send its delegation of the Anglican Consultative Council 16 in Lusaka.


Yesterday we reported the Archbishop’s displeasure that the Kenyan delegation to ACC 16 was going, contrary to his orders to the delegation.

It is charged that the letter of April 4th is fraudulent.

It is unusual for letters from Wabukala to appear on the Church of Kenya website without a lag. Usually they appear at the Gafcon site (he is chairman of Gafcon) or at conservative websites like Anglican Ink.

Addendum. The Archbishop of Canterbury, present at ACC16, makes clear in an address that the primates have no authority to sanction. ACNS reports ,

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has this afternoon briefed members of the Anglican Consultative Council, meeting at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in Lusaka, Zambia, on the outcome of the Primates’ gathering and meeting that took place in Canterbury Cathedral in January. This is the text of his address.

The text of a speech by the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby to the members of the Anglican Consultative Council meeting in Holy Cross Cathedral, Lusaka, Zambia
8 April 2016

Like all the Instruments of Communion, whether the ACC, the Archbishop of Canterbury (for I am not a human being, I am an Instrument of Communion and for that matter a focus of unity) or the Lambeth Conference, the Primates’ meeting has no legal authority over Provinces. Any kind of synodical control of that kind has been rejected since the first Lambeth Conference. Neither can any one instrument legally bind another Instrument.

“The unanimous (note that, unanimous) decision of the Primates (there was only one absent by choice, there were two others absent, one through family bereavement and one through illness) … The unanimous decision of the Primates was to walk together, however painful this is, and despite our differences, as a deep expression of our unity in the body of Christ.”

Given this commitment to their unity, it is inaccurate always to speak of suspension and expulsion, or sanction….

And yet the (allegedly fraudalent?) letter of April 4 from the Archbishop of Kenya speaks of “conforming with TEC’s suspension.”


Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Martin Reynolds

I find these extraordinary claims made by George Conger of some plot and an unsubstantiated accusation of fraud against a serving Kenyan bishop contravenes every ethic of journalism I was taught to follow.
But the letter from the Kenyan Archbishop dated 6th April says he had personally appealed to the Kenyan delegation, he spoke to them personally, and they refused his request/instruction to remain. So it seems rather odd to me that a supposedly fraudulent document dated the day before his letter had any influence on the situation.
The timings just don’t make sense.

Jeremy Bates

If the Primates unanimously agreed to walk together, then why have 4 provinces–count them: Uganda, Kenya, Nigeria, and Egypt–announced that they are boycotting ACC-16?

Martin Reynolds

Can anyone tell me if the supposedly fraudulent posting we see is a cached copy?
I’m just interested to know if there is evidence this actually appeared on the Internet.

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café