Bishops' Blog

Babu

The word in Swahili means ‘grandfather;’ it may be of Hindi origin. It is important because the ancestors, the ‘grandfathers’, mababu, lie at the heart of most traditional African cultures. For this reason they come into play in Christian mission history in both a negative and positive sense. They were challenged by the Gospel, and also, sometimes, appropriated in inculturation. An example of this is the idea of the ‘communion of the saints.’ The west African theologian Harry Sawyyer made use of this idea. Likewise the Kenyan liturgy refers to the ‘faithful ancestors.’

As a missionary I occasionally heard the first missionaries who brought the faith to Tanzania referred to as grandparents, as apostolic ancestors. Likewise I have seen the enthusiasm visitors to Canterbury Cathedral have had to see where ‘babu’ Thomas Becket died; it bespoke something deeper than curiosity.

My subject for this blog is actually contemporary global Anglican politics. I sometimes read from writers for GAFCON that doctrinal confession defines Anglicanism, and that the day may come for abandoning the corrupt pre-existing structures. I am sure such writers are sincere, and our doctrinal inheritance is invaluable. But I reckon this decision to leave would be harder for the African Church than some writers suppose. We Westerners are the ones who can abandon our roots more readily!

Now a predilection toward the ancestral is not the same thing as a commitment to an ancient primacy, bolstered by a catholic ecclesiology. But they aren’t completely unrelated either. My guess is that the coming Anglicanism centered in the global south will include its ancient patrimony, a gift symbolizing the apostolic inheritance and brought to them by their ‘grandparents’ in the faith.

+GRS

Consultation Report: ‘Communion and Disagreement’ hosted by TLC, VTS, Texas, and Dallas

• Professor Sonderegger, of VTS exhorted us to consider anew the Windsor Report. She agreed with it that the debate is not a ‘matter indifferent,’ nor may it be reduced to ‘context’ She wondered if we might not think of it as a truly theological debate, a ‘difference of the schools’ as in Roman Catholic history.  (Of course the need to make liturgical decisions, in matters of real moral disagreement, as Professor Wes Hill, pointed out, makes this tack more difficult.)
• Running through the consultation is the possible distinction from the Primates of walking together, but closely vs. at a distance. (Christopher Wells’ paper stressed this idea). If this is so, then might analogies from ecumenism fit those latter relations? In these cases we recognize one another as fellow baptized Christians, but with nuance. Wells pointed out that this was true of St. Augustine’s view of even the heretical Donatists.
• All of this highlighted our fruitfully anomalous circumstance: those in CP would live out this possibility of walking together as a Communion but at a distance, but close up with our fellow Episcopalians. This makes us, though we be few, a complicated and ‘interesting’ group in the Communion.
• The C of E’s ecumenical officer, Jeremy Worthen, distinguished between apostolic communion (is the other body a Church?), ecclesial (can we share our common life fully?), and issues short of either. The distinctions may help us imagine differentiated communion.
• The point of my paper was simply that John Henry Newman with his concept of development of doctrine and its tests had the right question, and that pursuing such a discernment requires patience and making room for the traditional view on the part of our own Church. peace +GRS

       Peace,

       +GRS