Friday, April 11, 2008

Keynote #2: A ‘global south’ perspective ...

... on Anglicans, solemnity and agreement.

Dr. Jenny Te Paa was our second Keynote Speaker at the Anglican Covenant Conference here at General Theological Seminary ... and I'll get to her "global south" perspective in a minute.
.
First, however, let me start with the panel of folks who kicked off the morning: from Berkeley @ Yale, Seabury-Western, Trinity (Toronto) & CDSP (respectively):

Joseph Britton had both "a hypothesis and a proposal" ... the hypothesis was that the "controversy du jour" in the Anglican Communion is not about a breakdown in moral theology, as some have, he said, suggested -- but rather about a distorted theology of ministry -- namely of the episcopate -- which errs in treating bishops as if they were "medieval lords in whom the whole identity of the church is vested."

Deidre Good presented a paper by Ellen Wondra (who was a victim of the American Airlines Meltdown) questioning the efficacy of a covenant designed to ensure "compliance" and asking whether the "Big C" Communion would not be better served if we adopted models of authority that operated in ways that enabled "small c" communion -- making communion itself not "a means but the goal."

David Neelands offered a most interesting walk through the 1549 prayerbook in questioning whether or not questioning someone else's standard for coming to communion fits within historic Anglicanism. (Hint: Not so much)

And Daniel Joslyn-Siemiatkoski addressed the proposed covenant from the perspective of "people of God who experience the church from below.

(I understand all these presentations will be available at some point somewhere and I do commend them to you ...)

Jenny Te Paa began by saying -- about the proposed covenant -- "So much solemnity and so little agreement" and regretting that it had "too many words written in too much haste." Offering what she called "serious but measured criticism at a percentage of the primates" she rejected the premise that we have "so-called irresolvable differences" and suggested we would be better served concentrating on the fact that "what we share in common as God's beloved Anglican people is ultimately of more import to God" than the differences that challenge us.

"We act as though what we have had as covenant relationship in the past never counted" she said ... "I have never doubted I am already in covenant relationship with a myriad of diverse experiences of the World Wide Communion in the Eucharist where memory is replayed as sacrament."

She then asked two key questions: "What now needs to be different?" and "Who is saying so and why?"

I will not attempt to relay her whole message here ... but key for many in the room was Dr. Te Paa's confession that she had reconsidered her initial support for "a covenant process" as a result of her experience since the Windsor Report was issued and declared herself to be "both proud and embarrassed by the naivete" that kept her from recognizing, at the time of the Lambeth Commission, just how much "power politics" were in play in pushing an "agenda for domination" by insisting that "what we already had in place was not sufficient" and shifting to "bullying rhetoric used to exploit differences over human sexuality" into what Dr. Te Paa called: sudden onset arch-episcopal paroxysm.

A way to "cure" that disease, she suggested, was to enlist the aid of those not impacted by the syndrome. Dr. Te Paa went onto suggest that the combination of women, young people, indigenous peoples and LGBT folk between them (by her math) who do not see the current differences as "irresolvable differences" came to approximately 75.3% of the Communion ... and that this significant majority of Anglicans needed to be part of a "slowed down, measured & considered process of inviting more stakeholders in the conversations about what it means to be in covenant relationship with each other as Anglicans" offering what she called "a Good News cure" to sudden onset arch-episcopal paroxysm.

She rocked.

She also rocked the boat a little. (Well, a little more than a little.) After lunch, Archbishop Gomez, (who had been what I thought was remarkably "non-defensive" last night during the Q&A following his initial address) took some umbrage to Dr. Te Paa's taking on the primates -- which she did with some gusto.

+Gomez rose and rejected the suggestion that the covenant proposal had been "top down" inspired by the primates and also used the opportunity to work in a quick treatise of his own on "global numbers" explaining that the "biblically orthodox" were a super majority in not only the Anglican Communion but in the wider Christian faith if we throw in the Romans and Eastern Orthodox, too.

Dr. Te Paa listened respectfully ... when he had "done" she said "Thank you, Archbishop" ... and when the moderator asked if she wanted to respond further she smiled politely and said "No, thank you" and went out to take her place in the audience ... right next to +Drexel Gomez.

The thing that struck me about the exchange was not how defensive the Archbishop became but how "apples and oranges" it all was. It was as if he hadn't heard a word she'd really said ... her point being NOT that 75.3% (by her reckoning) of the Anglican Communion AGREED with the American Episcopal Church or the Diocese of New Hampshire or whatever ... but that 75.3% DISAGREED that these differences of opinion rose the to level of "communion splitting."

It seemed to me that there in that exchange was an icon where we are and how we can move forward.

Where we "are" is still listening to the dogmatic voices of an increasingly small number of those (like Archbishop Gomez) with what Dr. Te Paa called "institutionalized power" insisting that they get to frame the debate and that since they say it's about biblical hermeneutics and since their "side" outnumbers ours they "win."

Not so fast.

Because meanwhile, increasing numbers of voices of reason and calm (like Dr. Te Paa) are doggedly insisting that the sky is not falling, the differences that challenge us do not have to become divisions that divide us unless we let them and that "in the Eucharist where memory is replayed as sacrament" we already are in covenant relationship -- with God and with each other.
.
Finally -- a "Good News Cure" for "sudden onset arch-episcopal paroxysm."
.
Thanks be to God!
.
More from NYC tomorrow!
.

11 comments:

Caminante said...

Great summary and bless you for having the brain cells to get this out... from a companion conferee.... Lee

Michael said...

Susan, Thank you once again for bringing such brilliant language as that spoken by Dr. Te Paa. When voices of reason like hers are introduced into the equation, there is a chance that more moderates will come to realize the current Covenant is an attempt for a certain group of bishops to seize control of the Anflican Communion. How we can even consider giving control to a group of bishops who condone the violence that Akinola has inflicted on Muslims and gays alike, is beyond belief. Bishop Akinola should have been denounced loudly by the Archbishop of Canterbury by name long ago and asked to resign his position. There is no question Akinola wants the power that resides in the Archbihop's position and he is close to getting it. Let us praise Dr. Te Paa and pray voices like hers continue to rise to convince the majority of bishops that the current Covenant is ill conceived, and a dialogue with parishoners throughout the world should occur before any further consideration is given to adopting a Covenant.

Lindy said...

Very, very good! Thanks for this and thank you for being there.

David |däˈvēd| said...

Living, present day saints, such as Dr. Jenny Te Paa scare the living shit out of primates like el Reverendisimo Drexel Gomez and the rest of the orthodox GS Gang, because she spreads logic and calm while they are shouting FIRE in a crowded theatre!

I think the GS pandilleros want to keep us all in a panic so as to ease their power grab into place quickly with our own consent. But folks like Dr. Jenny Te Paa ask the tough questions and offer the intelligent answers that slow the process down with cooler thinking.

This is why the Most Revd Dr Mouneer Hanna Anis, primate of the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem & The Middle East expressed such alarm when he learned that the process currently would extend in to the next decade.

Father Nelson said...

What a great bit of ethnocentric garbage! - to claim that women, young people, and indigenous peoples around the communion will all rally to support TEC.

First, you couldn't be that optimistic.

Second, don't you think they have an ability to think for themselves?

Peggy said...

I note with interest and approval Dr. Te Paa's recognition of the "Sudden Onset Arch-episcopal Paroxysm" syndrome (SOAP). I find it helpful to reflect that warm soapy water is used for enemas. It is no wonder then, that when SOAP is added to the waters of Holy Baptism (which are already a sufficient means of cleansing), what results is just what one would expect from an enema. On a more serious note, from the beginning of the twentieth century until now, I believe the undergirding struggle in our world has been around the whole issue of authority--who has it, where it is based, and how it should be exercised. The Church is just a little slower than culture in speaking out about our own symptoms.

Jeff Martinhauk said...

Thank God for you and for Dr. Te Paa (her name, and maybe her, remind me of TePau from Star Trek-- the kick ass Vulcan matriach that you didn't want to f*** with).

She doesn't seem to have any problem speaking truth to power and from the Archbishop's response, it appears that while it might not be enough to change his mind at least it is enough to air out the wound so that others can see it for what it is.

j

SUSAN RUSSELL said...

for father nelson:

Perhaps I failed to make clear what I heard Jenny Te Paa to be saying ... let me try again:

That as an indigenous woman who is not only the dean of a New Zealand seminary but was a member of the Lambeth Commissio and numerous inter-Anglican bodies, her experience is that the vast majority of those around the world-wide Anglican Communion whose voices are NOT at the table when the "make or break" pronouncements are pronounced from Primate Land are committed not to "rallying around TEC" but to being in communion and common mission with each other in spite of differences.

And THAT, actually, I am "that optimistic about."

Thanks for taking time to comment.

"Ms. Cornelius" said...

Man! I would have loved to be there!

LilBearSings said...

This is very encouraging news. A wonderful follow up will come when the many Biblical scholars who disagree that the societal bias and bigotry against LGBTI folk is supported by religious orthodoxy. The claim that sexual minorities are condemned by God is NOT supportable by either Church history nor Biblical critisism.

The Anglican Churches are places where "Dogma by Authority" has been rendered impotent. One can not make something true simply by refusing to hear any argument to the contrary, and eliminating all disenters.

As long as there are Bishops who aspire to be Popes in this communion no Covenant can be adopted that is not poluted by the irresponcible and sinful wielding of power for it's own sake by those whose chief interest is control and not communion.

gerry said...

Dr. Te Paa is surely speaking to power and at the same time is speaking for many of us in the pews.

IMHO most of us will be happy to co-exist in the Communion with everyone, so long as they will co-exist with us.

Looking around my home parish I see near unanimous opposition to the idea of adopting a Covenant that grants "Papal" power and authority to Cantaru, Ajuba, the Primates as a collective or to the Lambeth Conference.