In news this week, the Primate of Kenya announced that he will be consecrating a bishop for an extension of his province in the US. This is being publicized as some sort of "Global South Coalition" between Nigera, Rawanda, Kenya, etc. But I have a hard time seeing this as a coalition. A coalition works together, eliminating unnecessary duplication. I fail to see how adding yet another province to the schismatic mix is unitive. If they were truly a coalition, wouldn't they choose one province to have oversight, eliminating overlapping jurisdictions? No, I think calling this the work of a coalition would be like calling the Oklahoma Land Rush an example of careful urban planning. The overseas bishops have cut themselves off from TEC funding and the promised make-up by conservative groups has not materialized. It's now a "grab all you can" mentality with the dissenting congregations with each province trying to get the best plumbs from the bittersweet schismberry pie. The whole mess has reasserter blogger Dan Martins (an excellent writer) in a quandary. Speaking of the reasserter movement, he says:
"There seems to be an inexorable drive to circumvent the organic processes of the Anglican Communion, regulated--albeit informally and, one could say, haphazardly--by the Instruments of Unity, and confect a solution to our conflicts that the "instruments"--most palpably the Archbishop of Canterbury--will be asked to simply accept. Or not, as it may be. In which case--and here's where I break out into a cold sweat--there will effectively be civil war in the Anglican Communion, a schism that may not have the repercussions of the Great Schism of 1054, but which will be no minor tremor. We will be left with Canterburian and non-Canterburian Anglican churches. Only...will the latter actually be Anglican? Isn't communion with Canterbury of the esse of Anglican identity? Or is it only the bene esse...or, perhaps the plene esse?
Frankly, I find such a spectacle horrific in the extreme. The prospect of choosing between a Canterburian Anglicanism that is "ecclesiologically correct" but otherwise theologically and spiritually vacuous, and a non-Canterburian Anglicanism that is creedally orthodox and spiritually vital, but, lacking an organic continuity with a See that, if not apostolic, is at least ancient, and founded by the bishop of an apostolic See--and therefore essentially just one more Protestant denomination--well...this choice is too terrible to contemplate.
I feel like I have an Anglican soul, but it is a Canterburian Anglican soul. To be bereft of that vital organic link would be to surrender the very core of Anglican identity. I would urge my "reasserter" colleagues to exercise more patience. But I know that too many of them are way beyond the point of listening to such a plea."
That's the problem with scismberry pie. Once you have just a little slice, you're always wanting more.
mmmmmmm..... schismberry..........
David+
Technorati Tags: anglican, Anglican Communion, christianity, episcopal, religion
I'm on the 
