The skirmishing and shots fired on both sides has been going on for several months now, but the guns are growing bigger and louder and there are every indication that it will erupt into total war when all the Primates gather together in Ireland next February.

[b]Theology[/b]

Theologically the two men are poles apart. Dr. Williams is an Affirming Catholic, a movement begun in 1990 at St. Alban's Church in London under the auspices and guidance of Dr. Williams himself. The emphasis of Affirming Catholicism is to affirm tradition 'in its proper and fullest sense', not as a 'lifeboat in which to escape the present' but as 'a crucible in which the experiment of Christian life is constantly tested'. The focus of this movement is to reappropriate the fullness of catholic doctrine, focus on the Incarnation, encouraging the full insights of a catholic feminism. Genuine Catholicism, they argue, means full inclusion of members of the Church in the threefold ministry, regardless of gender or sexual orientation. The latter speaks volumes. One of its founding members is ECUSA Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold. He is also its American Patron.

A less well known clause in their positional statement is that it seeks to provide a crucial antidote to the rising tide of biblical fundamentalism that, in many parts of the Anglican Communion, is weakening the historic Anglican commitment to a balanced theology.

Archbishop Akinola, by contrast, is solidly Evangelical in theology and practice. That is to say he sees himself standing in the historic and intellectual lineage of men like Hooker, the Caroline Divines, and later men such as Simeon and J.C. Ryle. He is a product of the Church Missionary Society. His Anglican Evangelical heritage emphasizes biblical faith, personal conversion, piety, and, in general, the Protestant rather than the Catholic heritage of the Anglican Communion. Unlike a lot of evangelicals who regard themselves as "low church" Akinola sees himself liturgically as something of a high churchman. East Africa tends to be Low Church ecclesiologically, with West Africa tending to be high church. Akinola is more in the high church camp with regard to his ecclesiology.

It is precisely at a theological level though that the two men fundamentally differ and indeed disagree. It has been the aggressive evangelicalism of the Anglican Church in Nigeria, first under Archbishop Joseph Adetiloye and now under Akinola himself that has made it the world's largest diocese with some 18 million Anglican Christians. Akinola said recently that he plans to double the church in three years! If he is successful his province coupled with the Province of Uganda will be home to more than half the Anglican Communion between them!

By contrast the Church of England is declining in attendance, and the Church in Wales made no significant advance numerically under Williams when he was archbishop, living proof that Affirming Catholicism is little more than a theological exercise that impresses the few and is irrelevant to the many. Sin and salvation plays where inclusivity doesn't. New life where there is none is far more attractive than the finer points of "catholic feminism" or gender orientation. Furthermore the statement that Affirming-Catholicism is an alternative to "biblical fundamentalism" is an insult to evangelicals who do not see themselves as fundamentalists.' Fundamentalism' is equated with Jerry Falwell not with the Archbishop of Sydney, Australia. Furthermore if Williams and his Affirming Catholicism want to slam Nigerian Anglicans as 'fundamentalists' they might consider the fact that Nigeria has more earned PhDs among its bishops than the United States and Canadian provinces put together!

But theology is not the only arena where the two men sharply disagree.

[b]Sexuality[/b]

Sexuality issues also delineate the two men. Dr. Williams is pro-gay, his pamphlet 'The Body's Grace' lays out his views where he argues that homosexual practice for committed sodomites is perfectly acceptable and this poses no moral problems with Scripture which he sees at best as ambiguous about homosexual practice. He is in sync with the Presiding Bishop of the U.S. Frank Griswold whose province has ordained an openly homoerotic divorced man to the episcopacy and who considers homosexuality "hard wired." While Williams would not go that far, his rejection of practicing homosexuals is more one of timing for the communion than substance. He was a strong supporter of Jeffrey John, another homosexual, to be the Bishop of Reading and only back downed when the Church of England's Evangelicals threatened to pull the financial plug on him and the Diocese of Oxford. Williams blinked.

Akinola has repeatedly made it clear that Scripture is firmly opposed to homosexuality and neither he nor his African brethren will cave in on the subject despite repeated efforts at several primatial gatherings to break the Global South bishops of their alleged homophobia. This is now the lightening rod issue that threatens to unglue the whole communion…and may well do so. The Lambeth resolution on human sexuality delivered in 1998 was clear, unambiguous and binding. The Windsor Report was an attempt, albeit flawed, to find a way through the issue that many of us hoped would hold the communion together without it coming apart at the seams.

Frank Griswold has pushed the envelope to the brink of the precipice and the Global South bishops seem ready to push it over the edge along with Griswold, only their loyalty to Williams and the historic ties to Canterbury hold them back.

[b]Islam[/b]

It is here too that both men disagree in how they approach this aggressively evangelistically religion.

From Archbishop Akinola's perspective, followers of the Mohammed need to be converted to Jesus Christ, and his church has dozens of evangelists going out into villages with the message of the gospel day in and day out preaching the Good News. This writer has seen a village that was nominally Islam converted to Christ with amazing social changes that followed.

By contrast Archbishop Williams regards Islam as an "Abrahamic faith" on an equal footing with Christianity. He is happy to sit down in Cairo with Islamic leader and scholar Tantawi and talk about common ground and the evil of fundamentalism. He is happy to blame Western economic dominance as the cause of Islamic and Arab fury.

[b]Anglican Consultative Council[/b]

In the climate of East West Anglican relations few things have infuriated Archbishop Akinola more than the work of the ACC. It has been and continues to be a bastion of white liberal domination that rarely reflects the thinking of the Global South. Canon John Peterson, who shortly retires, was caught manipulating his Western (read American) paymasters to dilute the influence of the Global South over pansexual acceptance. Peterson has never been trusted by the Global South and his departure was generally welcomed, offering hopes that his replacement would be an African. It didn’t happen. Once again a liberal pro-gay Irishman was chosen to succeed Peterson, infuriating Akinola who stormed out of the ACC offices complaining that the only black faces were little more than low-level office staff. Williams made no effort to see that the fourth instrument of unity would have a black face, an insensitivity and rebuff that Akinola will not soon forget. At the time Akinola wrote a scathing letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury blasting the appointment of the new general secretary for the Anglican Consultative Council, Irish-born Canon Kenneth Kearon. In a stiffly worded letter to Williams and all the Primates, Akinola wrote saying he was "disappointed at the action that fails to take cognizance of the feelings and yearnings of those of us in the global south." His appeal to Williams changed nothing.

[b]Crossing boundaries[/b]

Crossing jurisdictional boundaries has become one of the most sensitive areas in inter-Anglican struggles. In the last two years Global South Primates have begun scooping up orthodox parishes in revisionist dioceses in the U.S. under the nose of Frank Griswold. This has become such a point of contention that Williams has entered the fray publicly condemning these perceived border violations.

The most recent border crossing involved Akinola himself. Just a week before the Windsor report was due out the Nigerian Primate dropped into the U.S. and announced the formation of a Nigerian Anglican parish in the Diocese of Washington, which annoyed both Bishop John Chane and Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold, and then he announced the formation of the Convocation of Nigerian Anglicans (CONA) which drew the public wrath of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Undaunted Akinola said that the Episcopal Church was not a spiritually safe place for evangelical Anglican Nigerians.

When the Windsor Report finally emerged, it was Akinola who blasted it publicly then returned to Nigeria furious that Griswold snatched victory from the jaws of defeat and that the commission chose to make those who crossed jurisdictional boundaries the bad guys. The Windsor Report confirmed his worst suspicions that the Anglican Communion is being run by white Western liberals who have the money and want to retain the power.

[b]Lagos[/b]

Following hard on the heels of the Windsor Report some 250 African bishops gathered in Lagos to look at their future. They gathered to discuss social, political and economic difficulties plaguing the continent. Among their issues was the continued rejection of Western money, the establishment of their own theological colleges and seminaries. They also went into Griswold's face by robing orthodox Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan as the real leader (primate) of the Episcopal Church, an act that has, so far, met with a stony silence from both New York City and Lambeth Palace.

Interestingly enough Williams did not turn up to this major gathering of archbishops drawing the fire and ire of the African bishops. Angered by the perceived snub to the Anglican Churches of Africa, a motion was put forward at the conference that sought to “censure” Dr Williams for his absence. Following a prolonged debate the chairman Bishop Johanes Seoka of Pretoria, urged the bishops not to act, arguing a rebuke would serve no positive purpose. The matter was put to a vote and the motion defeated by a three-to-two margin. Williams barely survived. Lambeth Palace offered no comment when queried on the vote. Ironically Seoka comes from the only liberal province on the African continent.

Thirteen months ago, sources in the Nigerian Church told the Church of England newspaper that Dr. Williams was invited to attend the conference but declined citing scheduling conflicts. This past summer a second invitation was extended to Dr Williams, who again declined pleading poverty, saying his travel budget for the year had been expended and Canon Herman Browne, Dr Williams’ assistant for Anglican Communion affairs was dispatched instead.

Dr Williams’ failure to appreciate the response from African bishops is the latest in a line of blunders and public relations fiascos that have damaged his personal standing with the overseas church, opined the evangelical newspaper.

Lord Carey, by contrast, was more popular abroad and his influence was at time stronger than in the Church of England.

But for Williams and Akinola there can be little doubt that whatever good will there was initially between the two men, it has now seriously eroded and the reservoir of trust has all but disappeared. The perception that Williams is on the same side as Griswold on homosexuality is also not lost on the African prelate and that is intolerable to the African leader. Akinola has repeatedly called on Griswold to repent of his actions in consecrating V. Gene Robinson, an action Griswold has repeatedly said he would not do. Williams has also not asked Griswold to repent.

Sources tell VirtueOnline that if push comes to shove Williams will side with the Global South against the liberal West and Frank Griswold, because of the sheer numbers, but that still does not answer a deeper question, do the Africans still want to stay in communion with Canterbury and Rowan Williams? It was, after all, Akinola who said, 'we don’t need to go through Canterbury to get to Jesus.'

Furthermore while old loyalties die hard, the Kingdom of God is not Canterbury cathedral or Lambeth Palace, and if the perception is that Williams is too compromised and will only side with them for purely political reasons it might not be enough to hold the Anglican Communion together. Compromise is now unacceptable to all parties in the communion.

The Year 2005 promises to be the most decisive year in the history of the Anglican Communion. It could see the great unraveling of the Communion, the abandonment of Williams and the total isolation of the American Episcopal Church. And the two men most likely to affect its outcome are the two titans of the communion - Archbishop Rowan Williams and Archbishop Peter Akinola.

For many orthodox laity, priests and bishops in the Episcopal Church it can't come soon enough.

END