Though I would quibble on some points and though some of my colleagues here at SF may disagree, I think BB has it basically right here.
Ladies and Gentleman. We have completely changed our mind about this letter. Sadly, after much reflection, it now appears to be one of the most extreme examples of passive/aggressive writing I have ever read. My first reading was based on assumptions from the past and those assumptions appear to be false on closer reading. This letter is so incredibly upsetting. Why would he write such a letter? I counted him amongst the heroes.
For bishops, charged with responsibilities - and especially primates in particular cultural venues - we can only imagine the torn and conflicted hearts amongst that order. At the very heart of the conflict is our Anglican identity. Why are people Anglican? The question is as simple and as complex as the first question on the Alpha Course. That question has to do with the identity of Jesus. But this question has to do with our identity as Christians. Why are we Anglican? What makes us Anglican? Is that the same as being Episcopalian? And who decides? God? Man? And what do we make of the cares and occupations of our lives? When trust is broken - whom do we trust?
He opens this letter by laying out his credentials - “I am one of you,” he says. We’re not sure who he’s writing to - who are his “brothers?” Yet it’s important to him that he lays the foundation of his own solidarity with these recipients. “I am one of you.” But then he reveals what appears to be the real agenda of the letter - intentional or unintentional, when people are in pain it’s very hard to tell - and that is to sow discord amongst the leaders of the Global South by claiming that there are unnamed forces from the North out to get them. With cunning brilliance, there’s no other way to describe it, he exploits age-old prejudices and bigotry, often in the most passive/aggressive ways. And he aims for scapegoats, for someone else to blame, taking none of the responsibility for himself - his apology, however masked, is for not showing up for a meeting he says he is honored to be invited to, yet to comes with without a direct explanation (have to mow lawn, feed ducks, take out trash) - though certainly we decipher his intentions indirectly. Tragically, his aim is at the very people whom the Global South primates have taken in as ecclesiastical refugees. He holds out his hand, and then nicely slaps us with the other. Just how far does the arm of litigation reach? I truly cannot believe it. I wonder if he does.
...more