Thinking Anglicans first wrote about this topic back on 16 August 2006. Since then, I have written further to various CANA officials but I have never had any response from anyone.
The “About CANA” page has moved since last year, and is now to be found here. The second link to “Archbishop Peter Akinola himself says this elsewhere on the site” has now moved here.
Mark Harris returned to the subject yesterday in CANA and inventive storytelling. He writes:
I was surprised to read the following on the Convocation of Anglicans in North America website, on the page titled, “What is CANA”:
“ECUSA proved over and over again that it was unwilling to respect the faith of Anglican Nigerians by its divisive actions. One of these actions was that ECUSA unilaterally sacked the former Nigerian chaplain appointed to care for Anglican Nigerians in this country, the Rev. Canon Gordon Okunsanya. So, we can really say that ECUSA itself made the creation of CANA necessary. Necessity is truly the mother of invention.”
Necessity is actually the mother of inventive storytelling. I had thought that Thinking Anglican’s [sic] rather complete review of the matter might have caused CANA to change this bit of the story of their beginnings, particularly since CANA went to some trouble to revamp their web presence, but I guess not. Nothing has been done.
The idea that ECUSA made the creation of CANA necessary, on any basis having to do with the appointment of Canon Okunsanya, is rot.
Mark Harris also draws attention to the misinformation contained on the Frequently Asked Questions page of the CANA website:
Now CANA asks and then answers, in the Frequently Asked Questions section of its web site, “Is such an international connection unusual? (The connection is between CANA and Nigeria and their work in the US)
Not really. For more than 160 years (1607–1776), the first Anglicans in this country existed as a missionary outpost under the Bishop of London, England. After the American Revolution, the Church of Scotland [sic] consecrated Samuel Seabury in 1789 as the first bishop of the fledgling Episcopal Church. Most of the Anglican provinces in existence today started as the result of a similar missionary initiative. More recent provinces have had similar international sponsorship.”
Once again CANA needs to clean up its act: Minor points are overlooked… the Anglicans were not “a missionary outpost,” perhaps the clergy sent here by the missionary societies were missionaries. And, let’s see…oh yes, the Episcopal Church of Scotland [sic] did consecrate Samuel Seabury, but he was sent off to England and then went to Scotland having been elected by at least somebody in the US to some particular venue (Connecticut) where there was NO bishop in place. He was not a missionary from Scotland.