For the meeting of Anglican bishops at Lambeth next year, the Archbishop of Canterbury (the “ABC,” as we Anglicans call him) has sent out his invitations … but for all the 800-odd bishops invited, he’s explicitly left two out.
One is Gene Robinson, the Bishop of New Hampshire, an openly gay man whose election as bishop by the diocese, and acceptance of same by the General Convention in 2003, has been the flash point for much of the Episcopal brouhaha since.
The other is Martyn Minns, who was officially invested as a bishop in the Church of Nigeria (but serving in the United States) by Abp Peter Akinola earlier this month, a cross-territorial move that was flew in the face of requests by both the Episcopal Church and of the ABC.
It’s a move that raises a lot of questions. First off is the social rudeness and ecclesiastical disunity involved in not inviting somene. But it also raises questions of whether the two were chose as opposite ends of the current Anglican split. Or, alternately, if the ABC really felt that one or the other would disrupt things too much (less as an individual and more for what he represented) but didn’t want to single out any one “side.”
For example, I suspect that had Bp Robinson been invited, some other bishops would have either refused to attend, or would have felt compelled to make some other overt sign of their displeasure. Ditto (though to a lesser degree) for Bp Minns.
(In further reading of other sources, it appear that the ABC left out Bp Robinson because of the controversy around him, even while acknowledging him as a real bishop. Bp Minns was also acknowledged a bishop, but CANA, his missionary group from Nigeria, is not identified as a consituent member of the Anglican Communion, a judgment that will doubtless stick in a few craws.)
“I have to reserve the right to withhold or withdraw invitations from bishops whose appointment, actions or manner of life have caused exceptionally serious division or scandal within the Communion,” Williams wrote in his invitations, which were sent out on Tuesday.
“I do not say this lightly, but I believe that we need to know as we meet that each participant recognizes and honors the task set before us and that there is an adequate level of mutual trust between us about this.”
The problem being, of course, that to withhold invitations is, itself, a sign of disunity and division. And, of course, “causing exceptionally serious division or scandal” is more than a little bit subjective. Someone would claim that of Abp Akinola. Some would claim that of Bp Jefferts Schori, the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church. I can certainly think of multiple bishops in the Episcopal Church who have acted in a scandalous, divisive fashion.
But, the, maybe the ABC is also thinking of some or all of the above.
It is possible that others will either not be invited or will have their invitations withdrawn before the conference takes place if anything “untoward or unacceptable” occurs between now and then, an Anglican spokesman said.
“There are one or two other cases where the archbishop is currently seeking further advice,” Tim Livesey, the head of public affairs for Lambeth Palace, told reporters.
Frankly, I think it’s a mistake on the ABC’s part. If someone chooses not to attend because of who else is there, that is their choice. Ancitipaing their criticism and proactively moving to avoid it is an attempt to avoid the truth, to paternalistically sacrifice the feelings of some of the feelings of others. Leaving out canonically invested bishops because division has erupted around them is not only a slippery slope, but flies in the face of the unity that the ABC claims to want to hold onto.
Of course, up to now, the ABC has been more accused of indecisiveness in the face of all the contention, and, alas, even in this (counterproductive) firm stand, he’s also betrayed his lack of commitment to his actions.
While the non-invitation of Robinson and Minns is likely to provoke debate, particularly in the United States and Africa, Livesey said it was possible that Robinson, at least, could be allowed to come as a “guest” of the conference — a minor concession that might temper criticism. “The archbishop is currently studying that possibility,” Livesey said.
A solution likely to appeal to none of the parties involved.
More from Father Jake (who notes others not invited), the Admiral of Morality, .
(via BD)
On the other hand, though most of the media is focusing on Bp Robinson not being invited, the exclusion of Bp Minns, too, may be all worthwhile to have pulled this response from Nigeria and Abp Akinola:
Since only the first set of invitations had been sent, it is premature to conclude who will be present or absent at the conference. However, the withholding of invitation to a Nigerian bishop, elected and consecrated by other Nigerian bishops will be viewed as withholding invitation to the entire House of Bishops of the Church of Nigeria.
Would that the Episcopal House of Bishops treat the snubbing of Bp Robinson the same way. Though this may mean that the Church of Nigeria and other Global South provinces may just stay away from Lambeth. Which might be a very good (if sad) thing.
The BBC News reports Canon Dr Chris Sugden “The quarrel is not with Gene Robinson but with the 60 bishops who consecrated him and indeed the leadership of the Episcopal Church. If the Archbishop was going to be just clear and transparent and honest he would not invite Gene Robinson or the 60 people who consecrated him.”
So much for the ABC trying to avoid controversy and division.
The ABC has asked for RSVPs by the end of July. Interestingly, the Episcopal Church has until the end of September to respond to the “demands” of the Primates meeting this past spring — the result of which response might lead to some further shuffling of invitations and acceptances.
*sigh* Interesting times.