Anglicanism and Empire

I have just finished reading Hong Kong theologian Kwok Pui-Lan on The Anglican Tradition from a Postcolonial Perspective, which is a terrific read, even if I do find a few bits disagreeable.

The basic problem is that global Anglicanism spread with the expansion of the British Empire; an Empire which acted with the same mendacity as most world empires. In many senses, Anglicanism was a chaplain to a brutal empire.

Now, it is complicated, Anglican clergy were often the whistle-blowers on imperial violence, and advocated for indigenous peoples wherever they went. The empire, out of its Christian principles, also abolished the trans-Atlantic slave trade, banned wife-burning in India, and foot-binding in China. It was the British - not the Persians or Afghans - who put themselves on trial in the House of Lords for their ransacking of India. In addition, the Anglican church exists in countries today where the British Empire never had a foothold, such as Congo, Japan, and Brazil. Colonialism too is never a one-way street, the colonizer is also gets influenced by the colonized. But, nuances aside, the Anglican church has gone hand in hand with British colonialism. And this is where Hong Kong theologian Kwok Pui-Lan (Candler School of Theology) and her book on Anglicanism and post-colonialism is a must-read for anyone interested in global Anglicanism.

Her post-colonial vision for the Anglican church is one where “Through their witness and activism, Afro-Anglicans, indigenous Anglicans and people of different racial and ethnic groups in the Anglican Communion want to expand the colonial church and claim their rightful place in God’s house with many mansions. They are committed to broadening the Chruch’s theological imagination and religious practices such that it can truly be one, holy catholic, and apostolic, as God has called it to be” (51).

My favourite sections are those on the Christian socialism of William Temple, and especially the chapter on “Women’s Leadership in the Global South” which includes the story of the ordination of Li Tim-Oi in Hong Kong which “transformed priesthood in the Communion and opened the doors for women to be ordained and some to become bishops” (182). Also, on “Mission and Interreligious Solidarity,” I learned some interesting things like according to 2012 statistics, half of the world’s migrants are Christians, and 60% of immigrants to the USA are Christian. She adds: “The global Anglican Communion with members in over 165 countries across national, linguistic, and cultural differences can be a beacon of hope and embrace the stranger and migrants in our midst” (211).

One quibble with the book is that Pui-Lan regards Anglicanism as ideationally vacuous in that it has no uniting theological creed, which I think is point-blank untrue. Anglicanism has a Catholic and Reformed confessional heritage spelled out in the 39 Articles and infused throughout the many prayer books of the communion. The problem is that some provinces regard orthodoxy as either optional or something to even be proscribed. The Anglican tradition is confessional, there are essential doctrines even amidst our diversity, but I felt that Pui-Lan does not contemplate the centre and boundary of that diversity. She champions “different incarnational realities,” which is fine if meant in the sense of “contextualization,” but potentially turns global Anglicanism into a loose confederation of provinces afflicted with theological contradictions and moral relativism. Some things are true across cultures, like “Jesus is Lord” and “murder is wrong,” it’s the unities and coherences that span cultures in global Anglicanism that Pui-Lan does not reckon with I think.

My biggest problem is that Pui-Lan is all in favor of empowering the Anglican churches of the global south, except when it comes to biblical prohibitions on human sexual behaviour and polygamy. She regards African and Asian adherence to traditional perspectives on these matters as acting as shills for Western fundamentalists and welcomes a white liberal re-colonization of the global south so that Africans in particular would be guided towards a sexual enlightenment (44, 150-52). I won’t dare to speak for my African and Asian colleagues, but I imagine they would regard this as deeply condescending and typical of white progressive contempt for the global south and straight out of the TEC playbook. Here is where I’d defer to Simon Chan and his defense of grass-roots Asian theology over and against his fellow Asian Theologians who have imbibed too much of the white Western elite culture.

That said, I think Pui-Lan lays out a good challenge to global Anglicanism:

In the twenty-first century, the Anglican Communion must determine whether it will be a relic of the colonial past or a bridge to the postcolonial future. It must develop an understanding of the church grounded in our baptismal covenant and values the contribution of women, youth, people of darker skin color, racial and sexual minorities, and indigenous and marginalized groups. … It must resist the temptation to turn the Communion into a huge, bureaucratic corporation, but rather strive to be a polycentric and multicultural communion of churches. Last but not least, it must promote renewal in theological education for lay and ordained ministry, so that a new generation of leaders can be formed as global citizens with a deepened understanding of the legacy of the colonial past and the global mandate for the church at the present. The Anglican communion will have a bright future if our leaders have a broad historical vision, cultural sensitivity, and humility to work with people with diverse points of view and faith tradition. (20-21).

So, yes, I learned a lot reading this book, it’s quite informative, issues very good challenges to global Anglicanism, a few things sound alarmingly TECie for my tastes, but I can recommend this book. Plus, I also recommend Pui-Lan’s co-edited book on The Hong Kong Protests and Political Theology.