I am Gandalf the white and now I return to you at the turn of the tide

When Gandalf spoke these words victory in the battle for middle earth seemed far from secure. The battle at Helms deep and Gondor had yet to come. Nonetheless there was an undeniable shift that occurred upon his return from the dead. I think that Lambeth already represents a positive shift in the communion.

I will start with the best news first. Conservatives have won the battle for the soul of Anglicanism. It is difficult for us in America to understand that the world does not revolve around our issues. The American Church is lost. Whether something emerges from Common Cause is yet to be seen. There is no doubt among the media or anyone paying attention that the overwhelming majority of the communion is Orthodox. It is becoming increasingly vocal. The statement of the Episcopal Church of Sudan represents the views of most Anglicans worldwide. Despite all the machinations of those in power at Lambeth the spin is not working. The majority of Anglicans worldwide oppose what TEC is doing. There is no way these bishops will be coerced into agreeing to disagree. They, like GAFCON, are not threatening to leave. For the foreseeable future any attempt to impose sub-biblical principles on the communion will not gain the consent of the majority. The only way the conservatives can lose is if they leave. One of the fruits of the Spirit is patience. In the long term Anglicanism will reflect the values of its majority. The final “reflection” that will emerge from Lambeth 2008 does not matter. What matters most is that the American church and its theology has been exposed as a vocal, well financed minority. It will remain that way throughout our lifetime. We cannot see into the future. There will be many ups and downs for the conservatives. Do we honestly believe there will be a communion in which Sudan, Uganda, Rwanda, West Africa, Tanzania, the West Indies, SE Asia, the Southern Cone, and Kenya assent to the theology of TEC? How much longer will the prideful TEC submit itself to this consistent scrutiny. We all know what is going to happen in GC 2009 or 2012. Will TEC even pretend to repent in the future? No, they will eventually exclude themselves. Between now and Lambeth 2018 there will be three (or four?) general conventions of TEC. Is it possible that TEC will behave itself? Is it possible that whoever the ABC is will be able to spin the craziness that will come out of these gatherings? We may not win today but the fruit of heresy will become clearer and clearer as time goes on

In the age of international media coverage and bloggers is it still possible for the west to control communication and perception? When the Lambeth press conference organizers refused to allow Archbishop Deng to speak he simply went around them. This will become more and more common. TEC overplayed its hand and has awakened the communion. The global south is no longer a plaything that allows upper-middle class Episcopalians the opportunity to feel good about its outreach and its connection to a diverse church. It is the voice of the communion.

This tract changed my life. After reading this my heart was set a flame for Anglican Christianity. I will give a little taste of the end to encourage you to read it all. If we had leadership like this at Lambeth I might be a little more hopeful.

But, if you will not adopt my view of the subject, which I offer to you, not doubtingly, yet (I hope) respectfully, at all events, CHOOSE YOUR SIDE. To remain neuter much longer will be itself to take a part. Choose your side; since side you shortly must, with one or other party, even though you do nothing. Fear to be of those, whose line is decided for them by chance circumstances, and who may perchance find themselves with the enemies of CHRIST, while they think but to remove themselves from worldly politics. Such abstinence is impossible in troublous times. HE THAT IS NOT WITH ME, IS AGAINST ME, AND HE THAT GATHERETH NOT WITH ME SCATTERETH ABROAD.

My question-that which at the age of fifty brought me to the verge of suicide-was the simplest of questions, lying in the soul of every man…a question without an answer to which one cannot live. It was: “What will come of what I am doing today or tomorrow? What will come of my whole life? Why should I live, why wish for anything, or do anything?” It can also be expressed thus: Is there any meaning in my life that the inevitable death awaiting me does not destroy?

–Leo Tolstoy, A confession cited in The Reason for God by Tim Keller

The vast majority of the Episcopal and the emerging Anglican Church in America are white and middle class. Most of our clergy are well educated. Before the time of troubles one particular strand of Episcopalian considered the Anglican Communion above mere Protestantism. How many of our conservative and Anglo-Catholic clergy came via books like Evangelicals on the Canterbury trail? We were not like the Baptists or God-forbid the Presbyterians. We were what the reformation should have produced, Reformed Catholicism.

There are a variety of reasons for our ability to make this claim. We had what is inarguably the most beautiful form of English language liturgy in the world. We had bishops, priests, and deacons, which is the historic way of ordering churches. There is one thing in particular that gave us cachet as we entered into dialogue with the Catholics at one dinner party and the non-denominationalists at another. England. Few will doubt that English culture still inspires tremendous respect throughout the world. Jane Austen, Shakespeare, Dickens, Eliot, Tolkien, are required reading for the educated. In the realm of theology, music, and art similar lists could be created. America does not have to depth of history and diversity to match the accomplishments of England. England created great beauty. America has created Wal-Mart and McDonalds. It does not matter that not all of these were affiliated with the Church of England. They are apart of the lore of England. That prestige of Britain has been historically linked with the British Church of which ECUSA was and is a part.

I have a great deal of respect for the Anglican Communion Institute. Their work on behalf of traditional Anglicanism is often met with scorn and ridicule by some on the internet. Even though I disagree with them, I never want to find myself emotionally invested in their failure. Their approach of working through the instruments of communion has the obvious appeal of being the accepted means of achieving discipline. (if discipline has ever even been attempted in Anglicanism) When I read Rev. Ephraim Radner’s, “Open Letter to the Bishops of the communion” as usual I found myself in agreement with him. (If we leave aside the fact that he continues to dismiss GAFCON as “fringe” movement when it represents the majority of practicing Anglicans in the world!). In his letter he calls on the bishops to do the following:

• State clearly that the Episcopal & Canadian Churches have stepped outside the bounds of Anglicanism. and expel them from future councils of the church
• Reconcile with those who have walked away i.e. GAFCON
• Recognize those American bishops & clergy who have remained faithful
• Establish a covenant that will order our common life together

I am not sure the irony of this has dawned on Ephraim or the ACI, but GAFCON, which he so strongly opposed, has already accomplished all four of these goals. It stated that TEC promoted a false gospel. It called on others to join in the declaration. It called for the recognition of Common Cause. It established a covenant that adherences to classical Anglicanism and took a clear stand on the issues confronting us today. It seems that Ephraim is asking Lambeth to do what GAFCON just did.

Absolutely beautiful!

 

 

I have compiled a list of things that Anglicans who uphold the authority of scripture have agreed to disagree.  Is there a unifying theme?  Are there things that should not be on this list?  Did I leave something out?

• Divorce and remarriage
• The use of contraceptives that are abortificents
• The gifts of the Spirit active or ceased
• Free will or predestination
• Real presence or memorial in regards to the Eucharist
• The Ordination of Women

We all know that the Church of England recently decided to ordain women without sufficient provision for those who disagree.  This seems like the deathblow to the Anglo-Catholic movement within the Church of England.  This little reflection seeks to find the place of the ministry of women within common cause.  Very often within the leadership of the common cause we hear of the “two integrities” on the issue of women’s ordination.  It is stated rather than discussed.  Very few people doubt that a large percentage of the voting block in both the Church of England and TEC who supported this movement in the 1970’s & 1990’s were liberals. They based their decision on perceived issues of justice not scripture.  I am not arguing that all those who supported this move were liberal.  Many evangelicals, Bob Duncan included, are in support of the ministry of women.  My request is that common cause actually engage in a dialogue that was not possible in a church that did not have a common respect for scriptures.  This should be public.  The priests and bishops of the movement should be allowed to take the lead in this debate.   This should be done before any provincial structure is completed.  If we agree that it is possible to hold two different positions, this should be rooted in some theological agreement that goes beyond the obvious statement that there are two points of view.  It should explain why ordination is something about which we can disagree, but other issues are non-negotiable.  In other words it should give us some basis on deciding which issues must be held in common.  I am not sure what the outcome of this debate would be, but I think it would make many in the movement feel comfortable about the way common cause functions as a body.  If we cannot have a contentious conversation as a body with inevitable dissenters are we not hypocrites for criticizing Rowan for refusing to make difficult decisions about the homosexual crisis?  Do realize that as far as I can tell there is not one scriptural/historical argument in favor of women’s ordination on any website related to common cause? This includes the dioceses that ordain women. 

Canterbury as a defining feature of Anglicanism: A comparison with Eastern Orthodoxy

The Anglican Communion’s current polity has no real claim to catholicity. It is at present a poor imitation of Catholic ecclesiology. Most evangelical Anglicans do not follow Catholic/Orthodox dialogues so they may have missed a little dust up caused by the Ravenna Document. It was released in November of 2007. The Russian Orthodox Church, which probably represents 2/3 of the worlds practicing orthodox, refused to accept it. One of the main bones of contention was the following description of the ecclesiology of the two churches as the:

Gathering together the bishops of local Churches in communion with the See of Rome or with the See of Constantinople, respectively

Russia’s argument was that although the ecumenical patriarch serves as an organizing principle in the communion, Orthodoxy has never been defined as all the churches in communion with the ecumenical patriarch. It has always been defined as all the churches agreeing with one another. From time to time various Orthodox churches have gone in and out of communion with the EP, but they have never in the eyes of the faithful ceased to be orthodox. The Russian Orthodox claim that the Roman Catholics are trying to create an Eastern pope to negotiate with the Western one. I will leave it to those ancient churches to settle their dispute. It is a good illustration of the fact that a church with a pedigree as ancient as the Roman Catholics do not define their church as communion with one particular See. It is based upon sacramental and theological union.