A thoughtful piece that highlights the irrationality of TEC’s radical agenda.

Agreed Alice, and I am glad to see it addressed to an audience in New England!

The phrase “they have problems, too”, would seem to establish an equivalence between TEC and the Church of Nigeria. Yet the problems listed in the full article are external to the church. In fact, the last word in the article is of praise for Anglican (and Catholic) bishops who resist the forces of social dissolution: interesting journalism.

Co-workers from Nigeria have spoken of the terrible situation there. One laughs that when her son was growing up here, the worst threat she could make was that she would send him back to Nigeria if he didn’t behave.

Helpful comments from Rhode Island.  The closing sentence is especially noteworthy American Episcopalians bent on the irradication of bigotry and the expansion of human rights should consider their church’s position in this wider context.”  

    It is TEC’s ecclesio-centrism, if I can use that term, which has been its undoing.  The world of physics teaches us that everything really is connected to everything else, and the smallest action “here” can have a dramatic effect “there.  It was Josiah Fearon, I believe, at Gen Con 2003 who said, with utmost gentleness, “When America sneezes, Africa catches a cold.” Our church’s radical lack of sensitivity to our neighbors has been very painful.
                                            Jennie

While many are focused on the (very important) issues which are tearing apart our church in the USA, this is an important reminder that there are greater concerns about us in the world. Our prayer, come Lord Jesus, Maranatha, must be prayed in earnest. Our politics will never save us, nor will out meetings, nor will our posts and blogs (though each is valuable, and an important incarnational expressions of our faith). Only Jesus returned and ruling can save us. Let us pray for Nigerians who face the prospect of bloody martyrdom or civil war as a real possibility.

I find the last senence unclear to a degree. Tellme, wha does it mean? What is the writer’s intent? I don’t think this is clear by any means. Larry

Ecclesiocentrism = ECUSA/TECcentrism, Larry.  There is more to the church than ECUSA/TEC’s new thang and it affects Christians all over the globe.  Clear, now?

Larry,
It strikes me that the writer is bending over to be deliberately mild and descriptive in tone.  He (or she?) is attempting to describe one position in the church as sympathetically as possible - the irradication of bigotry and expansion of human rights.  The word “bent” conveys to me an opinion on the part of the writer that those who are pursuing these goals are profoundly driven and single-minded in focus to the exclusion of all else.  The words “should consider their church’s position in this wider context”  sound to me as if the writer is offering (as gently as possible)  some constructive criticism.  The criticism I read as chiefly a reminder that TEC does not exist in a vacuum, and, instead of just focusing on what makes sense in our own context that we need to remember that we are a part of a larger picture and to try to understand rather than automatically condemn what we see and hear from other quarters of the Ang. Comm. (Nigeria being a case in point).  That’s what I got anyway…a kind of “walk a mile in the other fellow’s moccasins before you judge” type of argument.  Granted, it is exceptionally irenic in tone - not something one usually gets when Nigeria and Akinola are mentioned.

American Episcopalians bent on the irradication of bigotry and the expansion of human rights should consider their church’s position in this wider context.

I am with Larry.  I don’t get this sentence.  They can’t possibly argue that ++Akinola, a man who has openly supported anti-gay legislation and tried to fix his re-election to CAN, is opposed to bigotry and supports human rights.  I think this article is a ‘plant’ from some pro-Nigerian source.  The lack of source and the misspelling argue that it could be translated from a non-English writing.

When TEC and its loyalists hear something that challenges their worldview, it is quite common for them to have difficulty understanding.  The Primates don’t understand our polity.  Let’s invite the ABC to explain what’s being asked of us.  Why doesn’t Abp Akinola behave they way we expect he should if he were in OUR cultural context?

“You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.”

RE: “I think this article is a ‘plant’ from some pro-Nigerian source.”

Oh no!  You mean [gasp] like the article that was a “plant” about Akinola trying to “fix his re-election”?  ; > )  The funnest thing about all of this is watching the reappraisers just transparently and openly and blatantly—rather than cleverly and sneakily as in the old days—do those sorts of things.  It’s so brazen that, ironically, I yawn much more in response than I did when they tried to sneak it by, in the good old days of three years ago.

Suspect it is the difference at the top.

I appreciate it, but the ruth is it is still far from clear to me. I now think that this is its point. The writer is sitting on both sides of a fence, and he does not wish us to see even the fence clearly, much less his mugwumpery. I also agree that this was written by a non-English speaker.  Larry