Implications of Recent Disclosures Involving the Anglican Church of Rwanda and the Anglican Mission

By Robin G. Jordan

With the 2007 Rwandan canons Anglican Mission Canon Kevin Donlon appears to have utilized human weaknesses for his own ends. He appears to have exploited the weaknesses of Bishop Chuck Murphy particularly his desire for more control over the Anglican Mission, an organization that he as its chairman had built up since its founding in 1999. Bishop Murphy employed a corporate model, with the Anglican Mission's regional networks operating like branches of a corporation, its missionary bishops functioning as branch managers, its church planting network leaders functioning as middle managers, its churches operating as local franchises, and major decisions affecting the organization made at its national office. The 2007 Rwandan canons would provide an ecclesiastical basis for this structure and would concentrate more power into Bishop Murphy’s hands by making all authority in the Anglican Mission flow from him as the North American deputy or agent of the Primate of Rwanda. As the Primatial Vicar he was for all intents and purposes the Primate of Rwanda except when the Primate of Rwanda was visiting Anglican Mission churches in North America.

Bishop Murphy's decision to unilaterally separate the Anglican Mission from the Province of Rwanda appear to have been prompted by a Rwandan demand for accountability. Murphy appears to have seen in this demand an unwanted curtailment of his authority.

Under the provisions of the 2007 Rwandan canons such a decision would indeed be an act of rebellion against the Primate of Rwanda. Bishop Murphy is arguably putting himself at risk of presentment and trial for insubordination to his metropolitan, the Primate of Rwanda.

Bear in mind that Canon Donlon, not the Rwandans, included these provisions in the 2007 Rwandan canons. Unless Bishop Murphy did not read the draft of the 2007 Rwandan canons that his Canon for Ecclesiastic Affairs drew up and relied upon Donlon’s explanation of their contents, he knew that the 2007 Rwandan canons contained such provisions. He also approved the draft of the 2007 Rwandan canons.

With the 2007 Rwandan canons Canon Donlon also appears to have sought to exploit the possible weaknesses of the Rwandan bishops—their desire for greater authority in their own dioceses. The Roman Catholic structures incorporated into the 2007 Rwandan canons give them this authority. The 2007 Rwandan canons reduce the diocesan synod to a purely consultative body and make the diocesan bishop the sole legislator in the diocesan synod.

As I have noted elsewhere, the 2007 Rwandan canons are lengthy and verbose. They incorporate provisions typically not found in the canons of Anglican provinces. Their length and verbosity discourages close examination. There is also the problem of language differences.

By all accounts the Rwandan bishops in endorsing and promulgating the 2007 Rwandan canons relied upon then Archbishop Emmanuel Kollini’s assurance that the canons had been drawn up by an expert in canon law. This raises the question as to whether Archbishop Kollini himself examined the canons but relied upon Bishop Murphy’s assurance that a canon law expert had drafted them.

There is a very real possibility that Bishop Murphy, Archbishop Kollini, and the Rwandan House of Bishops did not examine the document before they agreed to it. If this is the case, it reflects poorly upon their leadership, as does the alternative possibility that they did read the document and agreed to it despite the alterations that it made in the doctrine of the Church of Rwanda and in turn the doctrine of the Anglican Mission.

What were Canon Donlon’s motives for submitting to Murphy and through Murphy to Kollini and the Rwandan House of Bishops a document that introduced Roman Catholic doctrines and structures in the Church of Rwanda and the Anglican Mission? What were the objectives that he was attempting to achieve? There are a number of possibilities. First, he was trying to ingratiate himself with Murphy and Kollini and further his career. He strengthened Murphy’s control over the Anglican Mission and spared the Rwandans the difficult work of drafting a new set of canons. Second, he was seeking to establish positions of influence for himself. Third, he was endeavoring to further an ideological agenda.

The articles Canon Donlon has written, the talks that he has given, and the subsequent positions that he has occupied offer clues to his motives and objectives. The articles Donlon has written and the talks he has given reveal him to be an ideologue. This perception of Canon Donlon is supported by the observations of a number of individuals who have worked with him on various projects. He is strongly ultra-Catholic in his views. He does not believe that the reformed catholicism of historic Anglicanism is Catholic enough. In his estimation to be Catholic the Anglican Church must be closer to the Roman Catholic Church in its faith, order, and practices. Since the drafting of the 2007 Rwandan canons Donlon has served in a number of positions in which he has been able to promote his views. He served with Bishop Murphy on the Common Cause Governance Task Force that drafted the constitution and canons of the Anglican Church in North America. He served on the GAFCON Theological Resource Group and serves on the GAFCON Theological Education and Formation Committee. He has been championing a revamping of Anglican ecclesiology. The restructuring of the Anglican Mission that he has proposed reflects his ultra-Catholic views. It is quite evident that Canon Donlon has sought to be the right person in the right place at the right time.

Human nature being what it is, changes like the ones Canon Donlon introduced with the 2007 Rwandan canons and which he has put forward with his Anglican Mission restructuring proposal are difficult to reverse once they are adopted. Donlon appears to be an astute observer of human nature and appears to be aware of this fact.

In that Canon Donlon has substituted a “different gospel” for the New Testament gospel with the 2007 Rwandan canons and is doing the same thing with his proposed restructuring of the Anglican Mission, he is causing tremendous harm to the cause of the gospel and ultimately the cause of Christ in the Church of Rwanda, the Anglican Mission, and the global Anglican fellowship of churches. This suggests that there may a spiritual dimension to his endeavors that deserves closer scrutiny. Spiritual forces may be at work exploiting Canon Donlon’s weaknesses to undo God’s work. If one considers what may come from this whole affair, it is a very real possibility.

Bishop Murphy would do well to back away from Canon Donlon’s proposal and recognize like John the Baptist that the time has come for him to decrease so that Christ may increase. He not only risks ruining his own reputation and the reputation of three retired Anglican Primates that he would draw into Canon Donlon’s scheme but also destroying the effectiveness of the Anglican Mission as a missionary organization. What good does it do to plant churches where the true gospel is not preached and false teaching is rife?

We all must give an accounting to God of what we have done in this life. The Scriptures tell us that a greater accounting will be required from those who are teachers. As a bishop Murphy has a commitment to teach the Christian faith and banish error. In his pursuit of his own ambitions he appears to have lost sight of this truth. As retired Rwandan Bishop John Rucyahana urged him to do, he needs to reconsider the course upon which he is intent.