By Berthier Lainirina, from Anglican Ink. (Photo credit: Neil Turner for ACO)
(Editor’s note: A Malagasy delegate to ACC-19 raises some extremely important points regarding the way ACC and other instruments of communion operate)
For many years, leaders in some Western churches have argued that disagreements over same-sex relationships should be understood through the lens of culture. We also heard such assumptions during the ACC-19 meeting in Belfast. African churches have repeatedly been urged to respect cultural differences and to appreciate perspectives that differ from their own.
My experience at ACC-19 in Belfast, however, left me asking a different question: if cultural diversity is so important, why were African ways of communicating, participating, and making decisions given so little attention?
This is not a complaint. It is about whether the structures of ACC-19 genuinely reflected the diversity of the Anglican Communion or whether they operated almost entirely through Western cultural assumptions.
Participation Through a Western Lens
Among African delegates, we often joked during meals that we were “fasting”. Much of the menu centered on potatoes and dishes that many of us would not normally consider a complete meal. We laughed, adapted, and enjoyed the fellowship. That was never the problem. Whenever people from different nations gather, everyone expects to make adjustments. We certainly did.
The real issue was the way the meeting itself was organized. Throughout ACC-19, participation depended heavily on written documents, digital platforms, and online communication. Delegates were expected to read documents electronically, submit feedback online, and contribute to discussions in two-minute speaking slots.
None of these methods is wrong. The problem arises when they become the only recognized way of participating in a Communion that describes itself as global. Every culture has its own ways of communicating, learning, and making decisions. A truly international gathering should seek to accommodate that diversity rather than assume that one approach fits everyone.
Elections Without Conversation
The elections highlighted this problem most clearly. Delegates were expected to vote for candidates after reading short biographies and written statements online. Many of us had never met one another, yet there was no opportunity for candidates to introduce themselves, explain their vision, or answer questions from delegates before voting. Instead, we were expected to make important decisions almost entirely on the basis of written profiles.