I think you’ve got it wrong, bob. The Arians were springing up quite literally everywhere, especially in the East, but Visigothic Spain was infected too. It wasn’t a matter of jurisdictional claim jumping at all. The issue was, were these Arians heretics or not? Would The Church condemn them as such and cut them off utterly as no longer not simply “former” brothers but indeed as enemies of God! The Council at Nicea, as were so many of the later Councils, was a culmination of ongoing condemnations, ongoing accusations of heresy brought against the heterodox.
Every Anglican bishop should go to Lambeth to be counted among the sheep or the goats. Staying away is craven and an abdication of responsibility. The heresy of 1st World Anglicanism must be soundly, loudly and publicly anathemized along with its proponents. Lambeth should be no place for talking or, God forbid, listening! The heretics, beginning with that clown the ArchDruid, should appear and the orthodox condemn them for the demonic lickspittles that they are.
But Anglican bishops won’t do that. They’ll either stay home or they will “dialog” because the foundational Elizabethan Compromise is all about avoiding trouble and keeping everyone happy, even at the expense of The Faith.
BTW, what would the Greeks do if the MP showed up consecrating bishops in Athens? Probably the same thing the MP did about the EP doing that in Ukraine and Estonia, go into a mini, and not too long lasting, schism. This is not a theological matter, bob. Its about canonical jurisdiction in orthodox ecclesiology. Frankly, since the ECUSA bishops have not been anathemized by, say +Akinola, Shori et al are correct that what +Akinola et al are doing is uncanonical and the ArchDruid may well be correct in refusing to recognize bishops like Minns, though I think that is more problematical. All in all, bob, what the orthodox Anglican bishops have done thus far, while understandable, is likely uncanonical and doesn’t come close to anathemization of the heresiarchs in a council.
If you are looking for thunderous personal condemnations of Schori, Griswold, and friends, you will not find them in the words of +Akinola and his allies. The orthodox Anglican primates are not given to levying personal insults. “Kind but firm” is their modus operandi (think of the eastern litany “let a righteous man rebuke in kindness”). Rebukes of the heresies perpetrated in Western circles (this sickness is not confined to just Anglicans in the West) are aplenty. Gathering everyone together in Lambeth Palace and having the orthodox point fingers at the liberals and shouting “heretic!” might make for some good headlines, but will not be real progress. If the Lambeth Conference is to be a gab fest and photo shoot, Nigeria and the rest of Africa won’t show up. +Akinola said his church cannot afford an “expensive episcopal jamboree.” If real work will be accomplished on addressing the problems and establishing a Covenant, then attendance will be worthwhile. Remember, most of the Anglican provinces don’t have a lot of money and many are outright refusing the pieces of silver from New York. It’s not a simple matter to fly the entire Nigerian House of Bishops to England for a two week conference.