"We are distressed by the unilateral actions of those provinces that are clearly determined to redefine what our common faith was once"
About this Quote
“Distressed” is doing a lot of diplomatic heavy lifting here: it sounds pastoral, even wounded, while signaling a hard boundary. Peter Akinola, speaking as a senior Anglican leader, isn’t just lamenting discord; he’s staking out who gets to define Anglican identity when the old center of gravity (historically, England and North America) no longer controls the map.
The key phrase is “unilateral actions.” It frames certain provinces not as reformers responding to local conscience, but as defectors breaking communion procedure. That’s a procedural critique disguised as a moral one: the charge isn’t merely that they believe differently, but that they acted without permission. In a global church where authority is famously dispersed, “unilateral” becomes a way to argue for discipline without admitting how little enforcement power exists.
Then comes the sharper blade: “redefine what our common faith was once.” “Common” invokes unity, but “was once” smuggles in nostalgia as theology, implying an original purity that present-day provinces are betraying. It casts change not as development but as revisionism, and it positions Akinola’s side as caretakers of continuity rather than participants in a power struggle.
The context is the Anglican Communion’s early-2000s crisis over sexuality and episcopal authority, with many churches in the Global South rejecting liberal moves in the U.S. and Canada. Subtextually, the sentence is also about postcolonial reversal: provinces once treated as mission fields now speak as guardians of orthodoxy, telling the old metropole that it’s the one drifting. The tone is restrained, but the intent is unmistakable: to legitimize resistance, rally allies, and redefine “communion” as doctrinal compliance rather than institutional togetherness.
The key phrase is “unilateral actions.” It frames certain provinces not as reformers responding to local conscience, but as defectors breaking communion procedure. That’s a procedural critique disguised as a moral one: the charge isn’t merely that they believe differently, but that they acted without permission. In a global church where authority is famously dispersed, “unilateral” becomes a way to argue for discipline without admitting how little enforcement power exists.
Then comes the sharper blade: “redefine what our common faith was once.” “Common” invokes unity, but “was once” smuggles in nostalgia as theology, implying an original purity that present-day provinces are betraying. It casts change not as development but as revisionism, and it positions Akinola’s side as caretakers of continuity rather than participants in a power struggle.
The context is the Anglican Communion’s early-2000s crisis over sexuality and episcopal authority, with many churches in the Global South rejecting liberal moves in the U.S. and Canada. Subtextually, the sentence is also about postcolonial reversal: provinces once treated as mission fields now speak as guardians of orthodoxy, telling the old metropole that it’s the one drifting. The tone is restrained, but the intent is unmistakable: to legitimize resistance, rally allies, and redefine “communion” as doctrinal compliance rather than institutional togetherness.
Quote Details
| Topic | Faith |
|---|
More Quotes by Peter
Add to List
