Sorry for the analogy but having been out shopping with my Mother only to find that she ends up liking the hat she was wearing when she started looking for a new one, it seems to me that something is going very wrong with the Covenant, General Synod, Conservatives and GAFCON (a critic yesterday explained that the latter was an amalgam of Gaffe and Conned!).
Seems that the primate house of GAFCON has engaged in monkeying around (or should that be aping?) regarding their support of the covenant because its wording is 'fatally flawed' such that their support for it is 'no longer appropriate'.
Now GAFCON has no influence or voice in itself but the primates do and the indication of withdrawal of support, being signed by:
The Most Rev’d Justice Akrofi, Archbishop, Anglican Province of West Africa
The Most Rev ‘d Emmanuel Kolini, Archbishop, Anglican Church of Rwanda
The Most Rev’d Valentino Mokiwa, Archbishop, Anglican Church of Tanzania
The Most Rev’d Nicholas Okoh, Archbishop, Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion)
The Most Rev’d Henry Orombi Archbishop, Church of Uganda
The Most Rev’d Eliud Wabukala, Archbishop, Anglican Church of Kenya
Pretty much indicates that the measure is doomed (it falls unless ALL thirty-eight Provinces approve).
The morning session of the General Synod showed that there is a large degree of support for it (even though some must be described as 'cautious')
So what's this all about? If the measure falls and the lunatics continue to run the asylum unabated and unchecked will this see some of the provinces (interestingly including those of the signatories above) throwing up their arms and taking their toys off to another body (mmm, now who could that be?) and the internecine struggles between revisionist and orthodox (the high church contingent having swum the Tiber leaving the C of E to sink so that they can issue a heartfelt 'mea culpa' for the body they loathe (sic) so much?
I think this morning, the Anglican Communion and GAFCON in particular are deserving of the 'You're a Golgafrincham' Award'in that they're:
"A load of useless, bloody loonies!
What is the issue here? Church unity. Church discipline? Orthodoxy vs Revisionism? Just wanting it all your own way?
Will someone please enlighten me?
3 comments:
The Covenant seeks to support the endavours of the Abrchbishop of Canterbury to keep the Anglican Communion united (but not always agreeing to everything) and the Gafcon people are undermining the whole thing because it will support their establishing a group of former Anglicans who put themselves forward as continuing Anglicans.
The conservatives have proved themselves to be weak, deceitful and intent only on splitting the church They do it by becoming papist puppets and by distabilising the CofE, always for their own ends and never for the good of Christ's bride.
I have to agree with Steadfast in that it appears that GAFCON and FIF both claim to stand for orthodoxy and church unity yet both have their own agendas regarding homosexuality and the ordination of women (respectively).
Good post
I really can't see what GAFCON are playing at here. Time and energy has been put into this Covenant, largely to try to find a way of keeping this constituency on board. Then at the very point when the CofE General Synod votes to support it, GAFCON turn round and say it has been a complete waste anyway. This seems quite childish. I am really tempted to despair.
Clayboy has some interesting questions regarding GAFCON/FOCA's claims here.
Post a Comment