Gay Anglican Bishop Gene Robinson can be forgiven his forlorn hope that – in singing ‘we shall overcome … someday’ – he will inspire black bishops to repent their homophobia and embrace him as one of God’s good shepherds too.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, is at his wits end trying to prevent the Anglican Church from blowing itself asunder. The Archbishop is the leader of a worldwide Anglican Communion of over 70 million people who worship under the auspices of the Church of England. But he’s now locked in a Jacobin fight with conservative bishops (primarily from Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, India and Latin America) for the hearts and souls of the Anglican faithful. This is a fight, however, that must make the Prophet Lot cringe with déjà vu. Because, the very “debauchery” that provoked God to destroy his Sodom and Gomorrah is allegedly provoking him to destroy the Anglican Church.
Yet, despite this ominous biblical precedent, recent conclaves of the Archbishop and his primates (leaders of the 38 provinces of the Church) have been characterized more by internecine rows than by reasoning together to determine “what saith the Lord” about the rights and privileges of homosexuals in their church.
These rows erupted in November 2003 when the Anglican Church of the United States consecrated Cannon Gene Robinson of New Hampshire as bishop. And it was only exacerbated when the Anglican Church of Canada vowed to continue performing gay marriages. These developments in turn compelled leaders of conservative provinces worldwide to call on the Archbishop to expel the U.S. and Canadian provinces or face defections – en masse – from the Church.
In response, the Archbishop did what any good politician would do: he commissioned a report. (By contrast, his most famous predecessor, Archbishop Thomas Becket, would surely have been guided by the unqualified conviction of his faith to act summarily – probably by ex-communicating Robinson and the bishops who consecrated him as well as those who performed gay marriages.) Nevertheless, the (Windsor) Report was commissioned “to consider ways in which the worldwide Anglican Communion can stay together in light of stresses created by issues such as the blessing of same-sex unions in one Canadian diocese and the election of a gay bishop in the U.S. Episcopal Church”.
Last Thursday, the Archbishop and his primates met in Northern Ireland to discuss the findings of the report. Unfortunately, it was immediately apparent that its conclusions did little to quell the spirit of insurrection that was simmering amongst conservative members of Church. Moreover, these church members – who believe that homosexual practices are an abomination against God – feel that the Archbishop betrayed his pastoral duties by allowing the “reprobate” U.S. and Canadian provinces to remain in the Anglican Communion. They are clearly not satisfied that, instead of excommunicating those proselytizing the gay agenda within the Church, the Archbishop settled for the report’s ambivalent recommendations; which state in part that:
“the standard of Christian teaching on matters of human sexuality had been seriously undermined by the recent developments in North America [and that] liberal provinces must cease and desist from their practice of ordaining gay clergy and performing same-sex marriages…and conservative provinces should hold in abeyance any thoughts of defecting from the church.”
That the Archbishop actually suspended the U.S. and Canadian provinces from the leadership of the church for three years evidently provides little consolation. Because those conservative bishops feel aggrieved by the challenge homosexuality presents to the longstanding tenets of their faith and the “supremacy and clarity…of God’s words.” It just so happens that those who feel most aggrieved are black Anglicans; whereas those most responsible for mounting this challenge are white Anglicans. Therefore, though few dare to say it, this schism is – at its core – one where race and culture are almost as determinative as subjective interpretations of the Bible.
Black Anglicans giving gays the look of ungodly prejudice that white baptists once gave blacks who dared to appear in their church pews
The Archbishop has lamented that “not having a common language, a common frame of reference” is at the heart of the differences between Anglicans who support the gay agenda and those who oppose it. But he is being either naïve or disingenuous.
Because it is no secret that deeply rooted cultural and sexual sensibilities are at the heart of this difference. This, because non-white Anglicans regard homosexuality as anathema to their defiantly patriarchal and heterosexual orientation. But their fervent opposition to the gay agenda is inspired even more by their reading of the holy scriptures which, they claim, condemn homosexuality as unnatural and a mortal sin (remember Lot’s Sodomites?). And, they hold these views notwithstanding the fact that their own Archbishop’s reading of those same scriptures defies theirs.
Therefore, regardless of admonitions and suspensions, there seems no hope for reconciling this row. Indeed, the leader of the Canadian province, Archbishop Andrew Hutchinson, presaged his acceptance of this fate by observing that “it may only be a matter of time before there is a permanent split in the world wide Anglican Communion.”
Meanwhile, his co-reprobate and the leader of the U.S. province, Archbishop Frank Griswold, was even more emphatic in declaring his province’s decision to ordain gay clergy to be sanctioned by God; even though it may prove “extremely problematic and difficult in many parts of the world” (especially in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean).
And he was right. Because in response to the ordination of Gene Robinson, Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria, who represents 17 million Anglicans, said he would refuse to recognise Bishop Robinson, no matter what church leaders decree. And in a statement endorsed by bishops (including Archbishop Greg Venables, the leader of the Church in South America and Archbishop Drexel Gomez, the leader of the Church in the Caribbean) who represent 50 million ACN church members, Ankiola declared that:
“We deplore the act of those bishops who have taken part in the consecration, which has now divided the church in violation of their obligation to guard the faith and unity of the church.”
Alas, there seems no compromise in the religious conviction of these non-white bishops which “rejects the expectation that [the lives of non-white Anglicans] in Christ should conform to the misguided theological, cultural, and sociological norms associated with [white Anglicans].”
It is helpful to bear in mind, however, that this a racial / cultural split in the Anglican Church is belated compared to similar splits that occurred in the Catholic, Methodist and Baptist churches many years
ago. Indeed, separate but equal (white and non-white) church services have long been a commonplace feature of religious worship in the United States and around the world.
But, what is ironic and, frankly, disappointing is that non-white Christians are using perverse religious and cultural rationalisations to discriminate against gays. After all, white Christians used similar rationalisations to discriminate against blacks not so long ago.
Note: Stay tuned for the declaration of religious independence by these conservatives from the worldwide Anglican Communion.
News and Politics
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.