October 11, 2004


African Bishop Travels to US to Establish Church for Anglicans Opposed to Appointment of Gay Bishop (Barbara Schoetzau, 07 Oct 2004, VOA News)

One of the highest ranking officials in the worldwide Anglican Church is traveling around the United States. He is exploring the possibility of setting up churches for members who strongly disagree with the American church's decision to appoint a homosexual bishop.

The decision one year ago by the American Episcopalian Church to elevate an openly gay priest, Gene Robinson, to the position of bishop of the northeastern state of New Hampshire has upset many in the church. Opponents of the decision say it violates historic doctrine. Now Peter Akinola, the archbishop of Nigeria, may offer an alternative.

"I am here to confer with Nigerian people who are Anglicans and to assure them that we are with them every inch of the way," he said. "And to others who have left the Episcopal Church, I have come to reassure that we work with them to establish a church in which they can find peace and joy and happiness and a conducive atmosphere in the service of the Lord. That's my mission."

The Christian mission endures, only the races of the civilized and the barbarians has changed.

Posted by Orrin Judd at October 11, 2004 11:35 AM

The Black Man's Burden, eh?

Posted by: Noel at October 11, 2004 11:55 AM

Absolutely hilarious to hear Protestants say "it violates historic doctrine"; if they cared about historic doctrine, they'd be Catholic

Posted by: JimGooding at October 11, 2004 12:58 PM

Careful with that argument, Jim. If you Catholics cared about it, you'd all be Jews.

Posted by: Peter B at October 11, 2004 1:24 PM

Grafted in, not planted apart

Posted by: JimGooding at October 11, 2004 1:28 PM

>The Black Man's Burden, eh?

Why not? The reason the Vatican isn't concerned with all the Euro-American hot-button issues (like Priestesses, Married Clergy, and Homosexual Marriages) is that European Christianity is dying, American Christianity is holding its own, and African/Asian/South American Christianity is growing like the Andromeda Strain. The current majority of Christians and the big church growth is in the Third World, and the type of Christianity they embrace is the traditional, version of the Salvation of Christ and Power of God, NOT our nuanced/psychotherapeutic/castrated First World version. There's power behind it there.

Here in SoCal, most of our new priests are either Hispanic or Asian; America is becoming a mission field and Europe is about as far gone as it was in the days of Peter & Paul.

And OJ, it's not a matter of "the civilized and the barbarians"; the Roman Empire was the pinnacle of Western Civilization at the time, and China surpassed it in the East. (And the later Mexica (Aztecs) are counted as a civilization, and you can't get more non-Christian than their Flowery Way.)

Posted by: Ken at October 11, 2004 5:54 PM

>If you Catholics cared about it, you'd all be Jews.

In a way, this Catholic wishes he was.

Have you ever read Thomas Cahill's Gifts of the Jews? My take on that text is that Judaism was about "transcending the animal" (a much more inspiring goal than "We Hate Darwin" or "Here Comes the Rapture" that seems to describe the sum total of today's Christianity).

There is also the Jewish idea of tikkun olam, something like healing a damaged and imperfect cosmos. (Doing SOMETHING, instead of just throwing up our hands and waiting for the End of the World.)

Add to that respect for learning, the arts, and other "secular" professions (as opposed to everybody having to be a Pastor, Missionary, or other "Christianese" aristocrat) and I keep wondering why I didn't jump ship.

Posted by: Ken at October 11, 2004 6:01 PM


Well said.

And to your jibe about "Here comes the Rapture", I would add the modern Protestant ethos that, if we just all sit down in a circle and talk about Love, everything will be just fine.

Posted by: Peter B at October 11, 2004 6:39 PM

40 years ago, miscegenation was a hot button issue among many religionists.

I wonder what the African Bishop's position on that would be.

After all, it is every bit as well grounded as the jeremiads against homosexuality and shell fish.

Posted by: Jeff Guinn at October 11, 2004 7:52 PM

Perhaps the current Anglican (and Episcopal) leadership feels towards these 'interlopers' the way the Sanhedrin felt towards St. Paul.

Posted by: jim hamlen at October 11, 2004 7:55 PM


It's extremely unpopular among blacks.,

Posted by: oj at October 11, 2004 8:02 PM

They call it "Race Treason" and "Genocide".

Posted by: Ken at October 11, 2004 8:18 PM


Don't upset Jeff. Like all good moderns, he gets very confused when the folks he fought for so hard don't hold the opinions he feels they should. I can't imagine what he is going to do when he realizes that women are turning on abortion.

Posted by: Peter B at October 12, 2004 6:52 AM

Ken, nothing new in my part of America.

In the South when I was a Catholic, we came under the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, not the Holy Office, and all our priests and almost all the nuns were foreign.

The priests were Irish mostly, though some Lebanese; and the nuns Irish and Italian.

I had hardly any US-born teachers until I got to college, and then a large minority were Canadian, Pakistani, Austrian, etc.

Posted by: Harry Eagar at October 12, 2004 12:49 PM