Lay Anglicana, the unofficial voice of the laity throughout the Anglican Communion.
This is the place to share news and views from the pews.

Get involved ...

Category - "Anglican Communion":

5th August 2012

Do Anglican Churches Really Want to Survive?: Wendy Dackson

 

Lay Anglicana is delighted to welcome the distinguished Dr Wendy Dackson as a regular contributor to this blog. She says:

I’m an ethnically Jewish American Episcopalian lay woman who was first baptised and confirmed in the Reformed Church of America, and holds a doctorate in theology from the very Jesuit Marquette University.   I’ve written on a variety of topics in Anglican theology and presented at conferences in the US, UK and Belgium.  I’ve taught theology, religious studies, and writing in various institutions of higher education in the US and UK, and am actively seeking my next post.

For a fuller version of her background, please see the end of this post.

◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊

 

A few years ago (2009, to be precise), I contributed an essay to a book on the enduring value of the work of Reinhold Niebuhr  My essay is chapter 6, on Niebuhr’s ‘outsider ecclesiology’.  Others have argued that Niebuhr’s vision of the Church is the weakest point In his theology.  My essay argues that the importance is that the surprising thing is that a person with Niebuhr’s privilege and influence within an institutional church is his effort to critique the church from the viewpoint of those who have little use for it.

Niebuhr held, as did 98th Archbishop of Canterbury William Temple (also an arguably privileged churchman) that people who declined to profess faith in Christ and his Church did not usually do so out of ignorance, stubbornness, or hardness of heart.  It was the fault of the Church if, in Temple’s great quip, the Church professed to be a foretaste of heaven, and people said, ‘well, then, I don’t care to go to heaven.’  It was because the Church was presenting the Christian message in ways that were unacceptable to non-Christians (Niebuhr even acknowledged that there might be historic reasons that it would never be acceptable to some groups), or perhaps non-Christians were not terribly impressed with the clash between professed belief and manner of living.

Taken together, the writing careers of Temple and Niebuhr covered roughly the first three-quarters of the 20th century, a time of unprecedented change.  But in the decades since Niebuhr’s death in 1971, categories of ‘church-rejectors’ (to coin a phrase) emerged that neither of these theologians could have imagined:  the ‘spiritual but not religious’, as Diana Butler Bass describes in her new book Christianity after Religion.  Citing both the famous departure of author Anne Rice from the Roman Catholic Church in 2010, and listening to the story of a woman she calls ‘Ellen’ (p. 22 et seq), it is clear that something important is happening.  These are not the stories of people who would rather sleep late on Sunday, or whose children’s sport activities conflict with church attendance.  Rather, these are thoughtful, serious women who have tried to carry out a meaningful spiritual quest within the framework of institutional religion, and for various reasons, their churches have failed them.  With regret, they have decided to leave, and proceed as best they can on their own.

I am sure these women are not alone—I have, on more than one occasion, found myself wondering why I stay in an institution that rarely meets my needs and routinely discourages me in a variety of ways.  All I can say by way of explanation is that I believe that institutional religions can meet many deep human needs, and that I hope I can help at least one to do that.

Bass’s focus, however, I think, unduly negative concerning religious institutions, drawing sharp lines between ‘religion’ and ‘spirituality’, and often arguing that ‘religion’ and its institutions are unhelpful in supporting either the individual’s journey towards a fuller life in God, and the formation of vibrant communities of faith.  As an ecclesiologist, I have reservations concerning this stance.  Institutions are the bearers of traditions of the ‘practices’ which Bass praises for their ability to assist spiritual formation and transformation.  Furthermore, properly functioning institutions have structures of accountability which help prevent ‘personality cults’ from developing around charismatic, but questionable, ‘leaders’, providing some measure of protection to people trying to deepen their relationship with their fellow human beings, the natural world, and the divine.  Finally, institutions can acquire and deploy resources on a scale usually unavailable to individuals and small groups, thereby assisting in philanthropic aims that are often the fruit of spiritual growth.  In terms of growth in spirituality, the institutional church still has much to offer.

For almost 20 years, I have been a relatively serious student of my chosen Christian tradition, the worldwide Anglican Communion.    I have recently completed an article in Anglican social theology (it will appear in the Autumn 2012 issue of Anglican Theological Review), and I have reason to believe that the ‘big questions’ I’ve outlined in it are things thoughtfully spiritual people seek to answer.  But they are not individually focused questions; rather they involve institutions and their place in society.  I explore the historic development of questions of ‘what is the nature and purpose of society in light of God’s intention for human beings?’; ‘what is the place of the Christian Church in an increasingly plural society?’; ‘what benefits does a distinctively Christian presence contribute to a society that acknowledges many spiritual and religious traditions?’  I dig up the pre-Reformation foundations of the tradition, examining how our notions of justice and good government are formed by Christian belief and history.

I am sure I am not the only lay person who wants to explore how belief has formed so many cherished ideas, so that we can revisit and question their appropriateness for the lives we live today, and the lives that will be lived by those who come after us.  However, the institutional Churches have not served particularly well for this.  They have too long been embroiled in discussing side issues, such as who can serve as an ordained minister, and nosing into the most private aspects of domestic arrangements.

There is, however, cause for hope.  Both the Episcopal Church in the USA, and the Church in Wales, have chosen to look carefully at their structures, to see if they can become more effective in deploying resources—financial, material, and human—in the interest of becoming more effective environments for people to explore ways to live lives of justice, wisdom, integrity and compassion in a contemporary world which too often lacks these qualities.  The Church in Wales, notably, has said that they cannot continue on as they have been doing.  There has been too much decline, too many people not attending services, and they have come up with excellent recommendations as to how to address some of this.  I have not seen the same clarity in the Episcopal Church, but there is a similar direction that has come out of the recent triennial General Convention.

My hope, however, is guarded.  An entirely new mode of pastoral provision is described in the Church in Wales Review—but those who train new ministers will be doing so from the viewpoint of people with ‘many long years’ experience in ministry.’   Which means, for the most part, people (still primarily men) who have been ordained for decades, and have learned to blame those who do not come to church for the church’s failure to provide spiritual sustenance.  It will mean that new clergy will be trained by people who are ‘successful’ at keeping the laity quiet and submissive—no matter how much lip-service is paid to ‘ministry of all the baptized’.

What other institution does this?  When a retailer or manufacturer does not reach its intended market, does it say, ‘We’ve got a tremendous product, how silly are they to reject it?  We’ll just keep it on the shelf, gathering dust, not bringing anyone through our doors, because we know how good it is.’  Of course not.  A smart, entrepreneurial business venture asks questions, and adapts.  It brings in new people on staff, it welcomes new points of view—even uncomfortable ones.  Hearing hard truths about why something is not working, and acting on what one hears, is the fastest way to get things working again.  And yet, this is exactly what the churches refuse to do.

I am not saying that there should not be experienced ordained people training people for ministry in the churches.  I am saying that alongside those experienced ordained people, future ministers need to hear—on a regular, frequent basis—from those who have not always been served well by the church.   I am one of the people who lives at the edge of the church, often with one foot out the door.  I am that rare creature:  a dissatisfied spiritual seeker, a lover of God, with a wide knowledge of theology.  I could help articulate the needs of many, and help the Church find ways back to being a vibrant community for spiritual growth and community service.  The Church doesn’t want that.

I am saddened that the Church has not seen fit to listen to my voice, because that indicates to me a basic institutional dishonesty.  The Church says it wants to grow and thrive.  It says it is concerned that the attendance numbers are significantly down in the last few decades.  It claims to be concerned that people are leaving—but blames it on the plethora of the other choices that our ‘consumerist’ society offers as alternatives to Sunday worship.

That last is patently false.  If the Church was meeting the deepest needs and yearnings of spiritual people, it would be a priority in their lives.  But it is not, and it chooses to ignore everything except the obvious.  Evelyn Underhill, the great Anglican mystic of the early 20th century, said that the ‘only really interesting thing about religion is God.’  People aren’t staying away from the Church to play football or shop—they’re staying away because they aren’t finding God.

The Church in Wales Review says that things have to change, that things cannot be done the same way as they have been.  The Review team spoke to a large number of people, and are happy to report that there are still a lot of people who feel deep affection and high regard for the Church, the local vicars, and the bishops.  Of course, they also report an overly deferential attitude toward the bishop and local clergy, so it would be very surprising if they heard from very many people who felt they could speak freely about their dissatisfactions and disappointment with the Church.  If the Review’s recommendations are to be implemented effectively, that needs to change.

◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊

EDUCATION

 

Ph.D. in Theology                                                                    December, 2000

Marquette University,Milwaukee,Wisconsin

Dissertation:  The Church, For and Against the Nations, in the Thought of William Temple.  Develops a political ecclesiology from the writings of William Temple (1881-1944).  Director:  D. Thomas Hughson, S.J.  Defended 25 August 2000.

Comprehensive examinations: Church-State Relations; Sacraments and Moral Formation; Authority and Community; Hebrew Prophecy; 19th Century Theological Liberalism.

 

M.T.S. in Theology                                                                   June 1995

Seabury-Western Theological Seminary,Evanston,Illinois

Thesis:  Eucharist as a Model of Economic Justice.

Director:  Timothy F. Sedgwick.

 

Master of Business Administration                                            May 1987

Binghamton University, Binghamton, New York

 

B.F.A. (Honours) in Music                                                        June 1984

YorkUniversity,Toronto,Ontario,Canada

 

PUBLICATIONS AND PAPERS

 

 Book:

The Ecclesiology of Archbishop William Temple (1881-1944).  2004, Edwin Mellen Press.

 

Articles &Essays:

‘Reinhold Niebuhr’s Outsider Ecclesiology’ in Reinhold Niebuhr & Contemporary Politics:  God and Power, ed. Richard Harries & Stephen Platten.  OUP, 2010.

‘Integrity, Alternative Aggressions, and Impaired Communion’ in Ecumenical Ecclesiology:  Unity, Diversity and Otherness in a Fragmented World, ed. Gesa Elsbeth Thiessen, T&T Clark, 2009.

“Archbishop William Temple And Public Theology in a Post-Christian Context.”  Journal of Anglican Studies.  December 2006.

“A Bridge to the New World:  William Temple’s American Ecumenism.” Anglican and Episcopal History, Spring 2005.

“William Stringfellow’s Sacramental Theology”, Journal of Anglican Studies, Winter 2004.

“But Was it Meant to be a Joke Legacy?  Ronald Preston as Heir to William Temple,” Studies in Christian Ethics, August 2004.

“Richard Hooker and American Religious Liberty,” Journal of Church and State, Winter 1999.

“William Temple:  Champion of the Jews,” Anglican and Episcopal History, April 1997.

 

 

Papers:

Our Own Others:  Natures, Purposes and Futures of Anglican Dioceses.  Receptive Ecumenism and Ecclesial Learning Symposium,UshawCollege,DurhamUK 14 January 2009.

Integrity, Alternative Aggressions, and Impaired Communion.  Ecclesiological Investigations Programme Unit, American Academy of Religions. San Diego,California,USA. 17 November, 2007

Toward a Theology of Laity.  Leuven Encounters in Systematic Theology,Leuven,Belgium. 9 November 2007.

IntegrityAlternative Aggressions and Impaired Communion. San Diego,AmericanAcademy of Religions Ecclesiological Investigations Program Unit, November 2007.

A Conversation in Implications for Public Theology in the Windsor Report.  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania:  Society for the Study of Anglicanism (additional meeting of the American Academy of Religions), November, 2005.  Joint presentation with Revd. Dr. Malcolm Brown, East Anglian Ministerial Training Course.

William Temple and the Challenge of the Post-Christian.  San Antonio, Texas:  Society for the Study of Anglicanism (additional meeting of the American Academy of Religions), November 2004. 

A Bridge to the Old World:  William Temple’s American Ecumenism. Chicago,Illinois:  Anglican-Lutheran Historical Conference,21 June 2004.

But Was it Meant to be a Joke Legacy?  Ronald Preston as Heir to William Temple.  Short paper presented as part of a Colloquium on “Ronald Preston and the Future of Christian Social Ethics”, the 2003 Samuel Ferguson Lectures in Social and Pastoral Theology, University of Manchester (UK), 14-15 March, 2003.

Tradition Constituted Inquiry:  A Proposal for Theological Method.  Upper Midwest Regional AAR. 28 April 2000. St. Paul,MN.

 

Book Reviews:

 

The Anglican Covenant.  Mark Chapman, Editor.  Practical Theology, Spring 2009.

Light in a Burning Glass:  A Systematic Presentation of Austin Farrer’s Theology.  By Robert Boak Slocum.  Theological Studies, June 2008.

Through the Eye of a Needle:  Theological Conversations over Political Economy  Edited by John Atherton and Hannah Skinner.  Journal of Church and State, Autumn 2007.

God vs. the Gavel:  Religion and the Rule of Law.  By Marci A. Hamilton.  Journal of Church and State, Spring 2006

Melting the Venusberg: A Feminist Theology of Music.  By Heidi Epstein.  Anglican Theological Review, Winter 2006

Bonds of Imperfection:  Christian Politics, Past and Present.  By Oliver O’Donovan and Joan Lockwood O’Donovan.  Journal of Anglican Studies, December 2005.

Political Worship:  Ethics for Christian Citizens.  By Bernd Wannenwetsch.  Anglican Theological Review.  Fall 2005.

Sacred and Secular:  Religion and Politics Worldwide.  By Pippa Norris and Ronald Inglehart.  Journal of Church and State, Summer 2005.

Is the Market Moral?  A Dialogue on Religion, Economics, and Justice.  By Rebecca M. Blank and William McGurn.  Anglican Theological Review, Summer 2005.

A Passionate Pilgrim:  A Biography of Bishop James A.Pike.  By David Robertson.  Journal of Church and State, Spring 2005.

Creation through Wisdom:  Theology and the New Biology.  By Celia Deane-Drummond.  Anglican Theological Review, Spring 2005.

Themes in Religion and American Culture.  Goff, Philip and Paul Harvey, eds.  Journal of Church and State, Autumn 2005.

Being Reconciled:  Ontology and Pardon.  By John Milbank.  Journal of Church and State, Winter 2005.

Secularisation.  By Edward Norman.  Anglican Theological Review, Autumn 2004.

Living Spirit, Living Practice:  Poetics, Politics, Epistemology.  By Ruth Frankenberg.  Journal of Church and State, Autumn 2004.

New Religious Movements in the 21st Century:  Legal, Political and Social Challenges in Global Perspective.  Edited by Philip Charles Lucas and Thomas Robbins. Journal of Church and State, Summer 2004.

Modernity and the Dilemma of North American Anglican Identities, 1880-1950.  By William H. Katerberg.  Journal of Church and State, Spring 2004.

Marginalization.  By John Atherton.  Journal of Church and State, Winter 2004.

September 11:  Religious Perspectives on the Causes and Consequences.  Ian S. Markham and Ibrahim Abu-Rabi, eds.  Journal of Church and State, Spring 2003.

Liberalism and Crime:  The British Experience.  By Robert R. Sullivan.  Journal of Church and State, Winter 2003.

The Social Gospel Today.  Christopher H. Evans, ed.  Journal of Church and State, Winter, 2002.

The Middle Way:  Theology, Politics and Economics in the Later Thought of R.H. Preston.  John R. Elford and Ian S. Markham, eds.  Journal of Church and State, Winter, 2002.

Politics, Theology, and History.  By Raymond Plant.  Journal of Church and State, Autumn 2001.

Reflections on the Theology of Richard Hooker:  An Elizabethan Addresses Modern Anglicanism.  By John Booty.  Journal of Church and State, Spring 2001

Public Theology for Changing Times.  By John Atherton.  Journal of Church and State, Spring 2001.

God, Britain, and Hitler in World War II:  The View of the British Clergy, 1939-1945.  By A.J. Hoover.  Journal of Church and State, Autumn 2000.

Revolutionary Anglicanism:  The Colonial Church of England During the American Revolution, by Nancy L. Roden.  Journal of Church and State, Spring 2000.

God, Faith and the New Millennium:  Christian Belief in an Age of Science, by Keith Ward.  Anglican Theological Review, Spring 2002.

Christian Thinking and Social Order:  Conviction Politics from the 1930s to the Present Day, edited by Marjorie Reeves.  Journal of Church and State, Winter 2000.

American Evangelicalism:  Embattled and Thriving, by Christian Smith.  Journal of Church and State, Fall 1999.

The Churches and Social Questions in Twentieth-Century Britain, by G.I.T Machin.  Journal of Church and State, Summer 1999.

Plurality and Christian Ethics, by Ian Markham.  Journal of Church and State, Summer 1999.

Heretics: The Other Side of Early Christianity, by Gerd Ludemann.  Anglican Theological Review, Summer 1998.

The Desire of the Nations: Recovering the Roots of Political Theology, by Oliver O’Donovan.  Journal of Church and State, Fall 1997.

 


EXPERIENCE

 

Diocese ofCanterbury,Canterbury,United KingdomAugust 2008—December 2010

Director of Studies, Licenced Ministries Training Scheme

Subject tutor:  Anglican Theology in Context, Introduction to Christian Theology, Church in Contemporary Culture, parish placements.

Also responsible for the preaching programme (not assessed), annual retreat, instruction on journaling and theological reflection, programmes for training incumbents and local group facilitators.

Design team, Kent Continuing Ministerial Education,Canterbury,United Kingdom, October 2008-July 2009

Project managed design and revalidation of the joint programme for curates inCanterburyand Rochester Dioceses, including design of several modules, leading to BA and MA awards in Ordained Theology throughCanterburyChristChurchUniversity.

RiponCollegeCuddesdon,Oxford, United Kingdom  June 2006 – April 2008

Research Fellow, Derby Diocesan ‘Clergy in Ministerial Context Project’

Designed and executed commissioned research in practical theology involving roles and identities of clergy across a single Church of England diocese.

Occasional Lecturer:

Ecclesiology:

Toward a Theology of Laity, November 2006 and 2007

Insiders/Outsiders, November 2006 and 2007

Impaired Communion November 2007

Anglican Theology

Archbishop William Temple, March 2007 and February 2008

Richard Hooker,13 March 2007

Eastern Region Ministry Course,Cambridge,United Kingdom

Guest lecturer, MA programme,3 November 2006

Toward a Theology of Laity

Insiders/Outsiders

Southern Theological Education & Training Scheme,Salisbury

Guest Lecturer, MA Programme June 2007

Congregational Studies

Oxford Ministry Course,Oxford,United Kingdom

Guest speaker, February 2007

Researching Congregations

January and February 2008

Insiders/Outsiders

Toward a Theology of Lay Ministry

Regent’sParkCollege,Oxford University, United Kingdom  October 2006 to Present

Fellow,OxfordCentre for Christianity and Contemporary Culture

Research Series in Practical Theology

Lecture:  Towards a Theology of Laity,23 February 2007

NiagaraUniversity,Niagara Falls,New York                 January to May 2004

Adjunct Senior Lecturer, Thinking and Writing

CanisiusCollege,Buffalo,New York                             January to May 2004

Adjunct Professor, Introduction to Religious Studies

RockValleyCollege,Rockford,Illinois                          Fall 2002

Adjunct Professor, Philosophy and Religion

Introduction to Philosophy, World Religions

Southwestern College, Winfield, Kansas                                    2001-2002

Visiting Assistant Professor, Religious Studies

Fall term:  Science and Religion, Responsibilities for the Future (practical ethics), Pastoral Writing (on-line professional studies course)

Spring term:  Introduction to Christian Religion, Comparative Religions, History of Christianity in the US andCanada; Renaissance through Enlightenment (on-line professional studies course); Theological Issues:  Ecclesiology (on-line professional studies course)

Seabury-Western Theological Seminary,Evanston,Illinois        Spring Quarter, 2001

Adjunct Faculty: Anglican Theology Since the Oxford Movement

CarthageCollege,Kenosha,Wisconsin                                      Fall 2000

Adjunct Instructor, Heritage I (an interdisciplinary first-semester freshman course aimed at improving academic skills in reading, writing, and critical thinking)

MarquetteUniversity,Milwaukee,Wisconsin                            1999-2000

Teaching Fellow in Theology.  Taught one section per semester of the required undergraduate Introduction to Theology.

MarquetteUniversity,Milwaukee, Wisconsin                            1997

Instructional Assistant in the College of Professional Studies.  Assisted with grading written assignments, and acted as substitute lecturer, for required theological ethics course in the weekend/evening degree program for working adults.

MarquetteUniversity,Milwaukee, Wisconsin                            1996

Teaching Assistant, Department of Theology.

Seabury-Western Theological Seminary,Evanston,Illinois        1994-1995

Student Editorial Assistant, Crossroads

Victory Theatre Association,Dayton,OH                                  1988-89

Marketing and Public Relations Director

 

BrazosValleySymphony Society,Bryan,TX                            1987-88

Executive Director

 

ADULT EDUCATION SERIES

What Do We Mean When We Say “Church”?  St. Augustine’s Episcopal Church, Wilmette, IL.  25 March, 2001.   

Science and Religion in Contemporary Anglican Theology.  St. Augustine’s Episcopal Church, Wilmette, IL.  October-November 1999.  Four-week series.

St. Augustine of Hippo.  St. Augustine’s Episcopal Church, Wilmette, IL.  April 18 and 25, 1999.  Two-week series.

William Temple.  St. Augustine’s Episcopal Church, Wilmette, IL. May 17, 1998.

Faith and Public Life.  St. Christopher’s Episcopal Church, River Hills, WI.  February 1997.

We Believe:  The Nicene Creed.  St. Christopher’s Episcopal Church, River Hills, WI. October-November 1996. Four-week series.  Repeated as a two-week series at St. Augustine’s, April 1997.

Anglican Luminaries:  Richard Hooker, Jeremy Taylor, William Temple. St. Christopher’s Episcopal Church, River Hills, WI.  January-February 1996. Three-week series.

Prayer and Scripture. St. Augustine’s Episcopal Church, Wilmette, IL.  April 1995.  Four-week series.

 


PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES AND SERVICE

 

AmericanAcademyof Religions

International Society for the Study of Anglicanism:  Advisory Committee

Journal of Anglican Studies:  Review Associate forNorth America

Association for Practical Theology (USA)

 

ACADEMIC AWARDS AND HONORS

 

MarquetteUniversity,Milwaukee,Wisconsin                            1999-2000

Teaching Fellow, Department of Theology

MarquetteUniversity,Milwaukee,Wisconsin                            1998-1999

Smith Family Fellow (Travel fellowship for dissertation research)

Charles M. Ross Trust Fellow                                                    1997-1999

Fellowship for Christian Leadership

Episcopal Diocese ofPennsylvania                                            1996-1999

Church Training and Deaconness House Scholarship

Order of the Daughters of the King                                           1996-1997

Masters’ Fund Scholarship

MarquetteUniversity,Milwaukee,Wisconsin                            1996-1999

Tuition Scholarship

Seabury-Western Theological Seminary                                     1995

Mercer Scholarship

Tags: , | Category: Anglican Communion, Church of England

15 Comments »
Posted by at 06:52

2nd August 2012

A Kingdom of Priests: Chris Fewings

 

One possible reason for the high temperature of debates over who may or may not become an Anglican priest or bishop is an over-reliance in our church culture on these callings in their current form. I’d like to take a look at the rôles of the parish priest in the Church of England which I guess will have some relevance to other Anglican churches. I’ll be considering particularly the Eucharist.

 

I’m writing as a not-very-faithful Anglican with ‘Catholic’ leanings, a rich heritage from a closed-loop non-conformist evangelical childhood, three years in a denomination with no paid ministers and no overall congregational leader, and four years spent worshiping with Roman Catholics in Honduras. I’ve also learned a lot by ‘visiting’ Orthodoxy, Hinduism, Islam and Buddhism. I’m not well informed on current debates on new models of leadership in the Church of England.

 

Typically, in my experience from the pews, the vicar performs several roles in the parish, including

  • parish manager and enabler
  • main preacher
  • celebrant of the Eucharist
  • counsellor

 

I suggest that focusing all these roles in one person may be unhelpful. In the twentieth century, lay leaders were given more prominence in local churches. We have Lay Readers who are trained to preach, lay people administering communion, lay people leading intercessions and of course reading lessons. Many dioceses, I suspect, have their own initiatives, for example training lay people to visit the sick. However, from my perspective, it’s always clear who wears the trousers. These leaders effectively receive their authority from the vicar or diocese, not from the congregation.

 

Some will protest that all authority in the church comes from the Spirit, but to my mind it’s disingenuous to refuse to examine the human power relationships. It may be that the majority of congregations prefer visible authority to be focused in one person. We can abdicate some of our own responsibility. We can idolise the incumbent, or grumble about them. We can project a parental role onto them – a provider perhaps, or someone to reassure or us, or to be stern and set limits.

 

I’m grateful to Stephen Day for clarifying for me an etymological confusion in the word priest on his blog. It derives from the Greek presbyteros, meaning elder (and of course, the words presbyter and elder are used by some churches for their officiants). But it’s also been used to translate hieros, a priest of the kind who performs sacrifices at the altar, as in early Judaism. In the New Testament, hieros is used of Jesus (for example in the Letter to the Hebrews), and by Peter to describe all followers of Jesus as ‘a royal priesthood’ (hierateuma).

 

If there’s a priest at the Eucharist, it’s not the celebrant. The Eucharist is a commemoration, perhaps an acting out, of Jesus self-offering, ‘priest and victim’. Jesus is present in his body, and his body is the church, the ‘holy people’ – those who have set themselves aside (at least for this hour!) to pay attention to his presence and participate in his self-offering.

 

So every celebration of the Eucharist is a concelebration, with one member of the body of Christ representing all of us. The celebrant is a focus for the whole congregation, just as the presence of Christ in a bit of bread is a focus for the presence of Christ in every little bit of his creation. This focused light can either blind us or help us see. At its best, focusing on one story enacted in one place opens our mind to the miracle everywhere, just as focusing on your breath in meditation may open the heart to the quietness at the centre of noise.

 

I don’t think there’s anything new or heretical in this ‘demoting’ of the priest to floor level. Yet almost everything in our church practice and organisation projects a different image. Can anyone in the church say the Eucharistic prayer? No. It’s not enough to be ‘in Christ’. You need years of training. You wear vestments which mark you out from everyone else. You may stand in an elevated position in the church, surrounded by other robed beings, who wait on you and do as you say.

 

It may be that every Anglican priest fully understands that they are simply the vehicle of a celebration of the Eucharist by the whole congregation, but what would lead anyone attending a communion service to think so? I don’t recall it ever being explained to me in a sermon.

 

For a few years as an adolescent, I was a member of a church with no fixed verbal liturgy except the words of institution, no minister or paid workers, no order of service except the inevitability that at some point one of the elders would stand up and improvise an introduction to the breaking of bread and sharing of wine. In practice much of the spontaneity was predictable, and I would now find their narrow interpretation of the Bible stifling. Women were silent!

 

When I discovered the riches of the Anglican liturgy (in its Series 3/ASB incarnation) I didn’t look back. But I often dream of a fusion of that simple egalitarian approach and the high art of a liturgy which celebrates the incarnation by connecting all our senses in the living tradition of the Eucharist we have inherited from at least the time of Constantine.

I suggest that each local church should have several members who are trained and ordained as celebrants of the Eucharist, to take the focus off an individual onto our becoming one body in the sharing of ‘body and blood’. I suggest that others are trained to preach, and that extreme caution should be exercised before allowing a gifted individual to take on both roles and risk being seen as having a divine right to lead. I suggest that the parish enabler, who co-ordinates and encourages the preachers, celebrants, musicians and others, should have no other leading role.

 

 

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

The illustration, via Wikimedia under CCL, is ‘Christ with the Host’ by Paolo de San Leocadio, 1445-1552.

Tags: , , , , | Category: Anglican Communion, Church of England

18 Comments »
Posted by at 19:35

1st August 2012

Lay Anglicana: The End of the Beginning?

Today, the first of August, we are – I hope – becalmed. Westminster and the political programmes on radio and television have temporarily disappeared. Even the Church seems quiet.

It seems a good moment to take stock of this blog, which I began in April 2011. So far, it has had modest success and I think has vindicated my belief that there is a need for a place in cyberspace where the laity can discuss the state of the Church, inform ourselves on related topics, and engage in theological discussion without needing a degree in theology.

Broadening the Authorship of the Blog

So far, so good. But it was always my intention and hope that the blog (and indeed the website as a whole) would truly become a group enterprise.  This is why I describe myself as ‘editor of Lay Anglicana’, obviously a curious description of a one-[wo]man enterprise. Rather it was an aspiration, as in ‘Beanz Meanz Heinz‘. Similarly, when I describe the blog as ‘the place to share news and views from the pews‘, this was aspirational rather than descriptive of its present scope.

From the beginning, I have invited the occasional guest blog post. Kathryn Rose gave us ‘The Organist’s View‘ on 21 June 2011 and there have been a trickle of other guest posts since. This month, however, we have had The Revd Andrew Cain on Anglo-Catholicism; Chris Fewings on the Church’s attitude to sex and gender; and the Revd Jody Stowell on Evangelicals, Bible and Gender.  These posts have proved extremely popular amongst readers: visits to the site in July rose to 3,170 from the normal 2,000-2,500 or so.  I take this to be a strong hint from someone, somewhere that I should now make every effort to broaden the authorship of the blog posts on a permanent basis.

Between now and the end of the year, we will acquire a new Archbishop of Canterbury and, with a fair wind, an episcopate which includes both sexes (or at least an agreement to do so). Although the Anglican Covenant gives occasional twitches to signal that it is not dead yet, there is every reason to hope that it will not give immediate trouble.

Apologia pro vita mea

Let us hope we return to more untroubled waters. Dame Catherine Wybourne, the Digital Nun, wrote a post on 30 July called: ‘Is it ever right to hate?’

I spent a little time yesterday catching up with some of my favourite (and not-so-favourite) blogs. Many were Christian, not a few were Catholic. One or two surprised me, perhaps troubled me might be a better word, with their vehemence about people or things they objected to. I don’t doubt the conviction or sincerity of the writers, but even when I agreed with their opinions, I sometimes felt very uncomfortable about the way in which they were expressing themselves. It is a challenge for every blogger. No one wants to read  dull or bland prose, but being passionate about something isn’t necessarily the measure of truth or persuasiveness. Do we need to be more careful how we express ourselves, or is it all right to hate?

I doubt whether she intended to single out Lay Anglicana, but her point went home. I have thought it necessary, in order to be effective, at times to be considerably sharper, and more aggressive, than I would be in normal life.  I have felt uncomfortable about this, to the point of seeking pastoral advice. The response was that I should continue as I was doing, while bearing in mind the possible dangers. My adviser and I both felt that a certain extravagance of speech was probably helpful in bringing about constructive change.

I commented on the Digital Nun’s post as follows:

Certainly, on what one might call the politics of our Church, I and several like me are, I think I would use the word ‘aghast’, at some recent developments. It is as if we are all in a boat attempting to steer a course between Scylla and Charybdis. Those in the galley have one view on the best course to steer, but the captain thinks differently. Do those in the galley hate the captain? No. Are those in the galley passionate and vehement in their attempts to persuade the captain to change course? Yes. Would a dispassionate observer be struck unpleasantly by the shrill cacophony and and sheer bad manners of those in the galley? Yes, and rightly so. What is to be done? At this juncture, all we can hope for is a return to calmer waters thanks to the forces of nature, or the emergence of a new captain who can encourage us all to row in the same direction.

I would love to hope, with Puck : “If we shadows have offended, think but this, and all is mended. ”

 

Immediate Plans

Intercessions: My priority for August is the completion of the collective piece we have been putting together.  The notes amount to 50 pages of A4, which now need cutting and pasting so that all the material is collated under the different headings. I had hoped to finish this earlier, but it has been a very eventful six months and I have at times felt I was fire-fighting.

More Authors: I am hoping to identify some people who might be willing to contribute articles on a continuing basis – if you have an idea for a piece, do contact me.

 

◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊

The illustration is an Italian fresco of about 1560 illustrating Scylla and Charybdis, downloaded from Wikimedia under CCL

 

Tags: | Category: Anglican Communion, Church of England

1 Comment »
Posted by at 17:36

29th April 2012

‘As Shrewd as a Snake and as Innocent as a Dove?’ (Matthew 10.16)


Well, here we go. This is the draft of the Lay Anglicana submission on the person specification for the next ++Cantuar, hereby offered as a coconut shy. Roll up, roll up, one and all and chuck your coconuts! Monday is the deadline, so there is not very much time. If you object to a phrase, by all means say so, but not without offering an alternative.

“Background

Anglican Communion:

  • Lay Anglicana respectfully suggests that, since during the next Archbishop of Canterbury’s term of office, there will almost certainly  be a demand from Provinces throughout the Communion for the role of ‘primus inter pares’ (not head) to rotate amongs the various Primates, which should in our view be welcomed by the Church of England, the elusive ability to unite the various factions within the Communion (which we doubt any human being possesses) should not be a criterion.

The Church of England:

  • Traditionally, Cantuar has been chosen alternately from the ranks of the Evangelical wing and the Anglo-Catholics. We urge a departure from this tradition, with the choosing of a candidate who, whatever his personal traditions, sees himself first of all as a follower of Jesus whose role is to harness the various groups within the Church into a more effective proclamation of the Gospel through Mission and Ministry.

 

Beliefs and Qualities

  • As the number of paid clergy declines, Lay Anglicana hopes very much for the appointment of an Archbishop of Canterbury who sees the need for the empowerment  and further training of the laity, with a view to increasing their role in the leadership of the Church, and rejects the alternative of closing churches for lack of ordained priests.
  • As the Church has voted overwhelmingly in diocesan synods and General Synod for the raising of women priests to the episcopate, and also against the Anglican Communion Covenant, the next Cantuar, in our view,  needs to be drawn from the ranks of those bishops who are not opposed to women bishops, but who are opposed to the Covenant.
  • In this media age, it is desirable that the next Archbishop of Canterbury should be a skilled communicator, reaching out beyond our congregations to all the people of this land with political sensitivity, being prepared also to listen. He also needs the presence and clerical skills to officiate at great state occasions, in fulfilment of his role as Primate of the established Church of the nation.
  • In line with this, the candidate needs to be open to Indaba amongst his own people, fostering peaceful – and loving- coexistence amongst the disparate groups, while remaining open to constructive change. He needs the philosophy of Hooker’s [three-legged stool]  ‘scripture, reason and tradition’ as well as the  Chicago Lambeth Quadrilateral as his guides. We would hope that his aim would be to lead an inclusive Church, pastorally and culturally sensitive to all.
  • He will need a spiritual and mental robustness to deal with all that he is likely to face. “

 

◊◊◊◊◊◊◊

The icon is of Saint Gregory and Saint Augustine – seemed a kinder role model than Thomas a Becket or Cranmer!

The expression ‘three-legged stool’ was removed on advice (see comments) and the phrase in red type was substituted.

Category: Anglican Communion, Archbishop of Canterbury, Church of England

4 Comments »
Posted by at 11:49

30th March 2012

Shouldn’t the Anglican Communion be Commemorated in the Calendar?

 

I have just noticed something very odd. The Archbishop of Canterbury, the Archbishop of York,  the bishops and others who supported the introduction of the Anglican Covenant all protested undying love for the Anglican Communion. The Communion, they said, is so important to us, the Church of England, that it is worth any petty sacrifice that may be necessary in order to maintain it as a united body.

Really? Then why is there no commemoration of the Anglican Communion in the Church of England Calendar? Let us look at the shortest month, February. As the rubric explains:

In the printing of the Calendar, Principal Feasts and other Principal Holy Days are printed in bold; Festivals are printed in roman typeface; other Sundays and Lesser Festivals are printed in ordinary roman typeface, in black. Commemorations are printed in italics.

1
 Brigid, Abbess of Kildare, c.525
2
 The Presentation of Christ in the Temple (Candlemas)
3
 Anskar, Archbishop of Hamburg, Missionary in Denmark and Sweden, 865
4
 Gilbert of Sempringham, Founder of the Gilbertine Order, 1189
6
 The Martyrs of Japan, 1597      
10
 Scholastica, sister of Benedict, Abbess of Plombariola, c.543
14
 Cyril and Methodius, Missionaries to the Slavs, 869 and 885
14
 Valentine, Martyr at Rome, c.269 
15
 Sigfrid, Bishop, Apostle of Sweden, 1045
15
 Thomas Bray, Priest, Founder of the SPCK and the SPG, 1730
17
 Janani Luwum, Archbishop of Uganda, Martyr, 1977
23
 Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, Martyr, c.155
27
 George Herbert, Priest, Poet, 1633

 

This follows the pattern of the rest of the year. Out of 27 events celebrated by the Church, there are seven commemorations and five festivals. I know you have heard of George Herbert and St Valentine, but are Cyril and Methodius household names? I think not. What about Anskar, Archbishop of Hamburg? Unknown, I would suggest, to the proverbial man on the Clapham omnibus. And yet they merit a place in our calendar. Please do not misunderstand. I do not begrudge these worthies their annual 24 hours of fame. I merely think it odd that the Anglican Communion is not similarly commemorated.

After all the unhappiness of the last few years, wrangling over successive drafts of the Covenant, let us now move on as swiftly as possible to strengthening ties around and among the Communion.

I suggest that we do this by identifying a day in the calendar on which we could celebrate the Anglican Communion, preferably as a festival. For a date, we could do worse than combine it with the festival of Richard Hooker, described as ‘Anglican Apologist, Teacher of the Faith’, and essentially the first person to give shape and identity to Anglicanism as a comprehensive and tolerant theology. This would be 3rd November, which this year falls on a Saturday.

And secondly, we need a liturgy for a commemorative service on the day. Anticipating a lengthy argument if the Covenant is anything to go by, I suggest a form of readings, prayers and hymns somewhat like an ordinary memorial service. Prayers from the prayer books used by all the Churches in the Communion could form an anthology from which people could devise their own services, using their reason and local tradition of course.

One hymn we surely must include is:

The day Thou gavest, Lord, is ended,

The darkness falls at Thy behest;

To Thee our morning hymns ascended,

Thy praise shall sanctify our rest.

 

We thank Thee that Thy church, unsleeping,

While earth rolls onward into light,

Through all the world her watch is keeping,

And rests not now by day or night.

 

As o’er each continent and island

The dawn leads on another day,

The voice of prayer is never silent,

Nor dies the strain of praise away.

 

The sun that bids us rest is waking

Our brethren ’neath the western sky,

And hour by hour fresh lips are making

Thy wondrous doings heard on high.

 

So be it, Lord; Thy throne shall never,

Like earth’s proud empires, pass away:

Thy kingdom stands, and grows forever,

Till all Thy creatures own Thy sway.

But if you would rather have something by Graham Kendrick, please go ahead!

Category: Anglican Communion

13 Comments »
Posted by at 15:34

28th March 2012

The Covenant: It’s Dead But It Won’t Lie Down!

Benny Hazlehurst has laid the Covenant to rest (without adding the now customary ‘And rise in glory’:)

There are those who are still trying to pretend that the Covenant is still alive, desperately trying to breathe life into its limp body, while claiming still to feel the faintest pulse.  They are mistaken. What is needed now is to recognise the will of the Synodical process, and express deep and sincere thanks to those who genuinely tried to find a way forward for the Anglican Communion in the form of a Covenant – and to let it now Rest in Peace. Having led hundreds of funerals since my ordination over 20 years ago, I know that the best funerals are those where the mourners gather to say a loving good bye – and the worst are those where the grievers meet in a kind of desperate denial. For the good intentions of those who tried to square this circle, the Anglican Covenant deserves a good funeral which will enable us all to move on and find new ways of living together as the living Anglican Body of Christ.

Bishop Alan has poured scorn on attempts to resuscitate the corpse (the Covenant – not the Church as a whole, which may actually be rejuvenated by events).

The Fulcrum website appears to recognise that the game is over, at least for now. First Andrew Goddard,

  It is also the case that General Synod cannot reconsider the Act during this Synod. It would be open to the new Synod, elected in 2015, to again request the dioceses to approve a draft Act of Synod adopting the covenant or consider an alternative way of the Church of England adopting it.  However, unless there are significant changes in the text of the covenant or strong evidence of a serious change of mind within the wider church (perhaps if most provinces do adopt it and we are a small minority refusing), both of these paths would appear unwise.

and then Bishop Graham Kings

…The Covenant was designed as a ‘web of mutuality’ across the Anglican Communion: a balance of provincial autonomy with world-wide interdependence and accountability. The Covenant sets out an orderly process towards the resolutions of conflicts to replace the chaotic, hastily arranged meetings of the past, which too often have led to a barrage of curses and contested statements. Tragically, last Saturday, the Covenant was voted down in three dioceses of the Church of England and now cannot be debated and voted on in General Synod next July. It needed over half of the 44 dioceses to vote for it positively. So far 23 dioceses have voted no, and 15 yes. Interestingly, the total number of votes, so far, is slightly over half in favour and, amongst the bishops, nearly 80% were in favour.

 

However, the Secretary General of the Anglican Communion Office, Canon Kenneth Kearon, put out a statement sounding remarkably like Michael Palin as the unfortunate salesman in the Monty Python dead parrot sketch:


In short, it is dead, but it won’t lie down!

Category: Anglican Communion, Anglican Covenant

8 Comments »
Posted by at 11:03

24th March 2012

On A Knife Edge


Vote For the Covenant!
Vote Against the Covenant!

Vote out of conviction
Vote with your best judgement
Vote for what’s best for the Church

But don’t be rail-roaded!
Don’t be bounced into a vote on the future of the Communion!
You were elected to bring your best judgement to the issues.

Anyone who follows Paul Bagshaw’s ‘Not The Same Stream’ blog knows that he is normally the most restrained and sober of men. But this is an extract from his blog of yesterday, a clarion call in glorious technicolour to the people in the six dioceses who are to vote today and the remaining six who are to vote before the end of April.

 

Today is the turn of:

Blackburn
Exeter
Guildford
Lincoln
Oxford
Peterborough

Because the voting tally so far is 20 against the Covenant, with only 12 for, it is tempting to project that the outcome of today will be in a similar proportion. Sadly, however, the laws of probability do not work like that.  The reason for this is that, pace the Bishop of Sherborne, the people of the Church of England are much more like marbles than they are like grapes: they do not live, move and have their being in neat, predictable ways.

 

In situations like this, people have always consulted oracles. The most famous one of ancient times was the one at Delphi, of which Heraclitus said ‘it neither reveals nor conceals but gives a sign’. Teenagers since Victorian times have consulted The Ladies’ Oracle, which has now been turned into an Android game. Between the two, many people who were looking for a sign from God to help them come to a decision used to open the Bible at random and light on a verse, equally randomly. This verse would then be read and re-read, looking for illumination.

 

I had thought these days that I was no longer susceptible to that sort of fatalistic approach to messages from God. Well, life (and God) still have the capacity to surprise. Have you seen the lectionary for tomorrow, the fifth Sunday of Lent? The first reading at the principal service, according to Visual Liturgy, is Jeremiah 31.31-34

31 The days are surely coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. 32 It will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt – a covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, says the Lord. 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 No longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other, ‘Know the Lord’, for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and remember their sin no more.

The bold emphasis is of course mine, and you may read the passage completely differently. But to me, the message from God could hardly be clearer:

There is no need for a written Covenant, because I will write it in your hearts.

Nor is there any need for you to teach your neighbour how to know me.

Category: Anglican Communion, Anglican Covenant, Church of England

7 Comments »
Posted by at 08:06

16th March 2012

The End Of The Beginning?

It is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is perhaps the end of the beginning.

I hope I have remembered that remark by Winston Churchill correctly (no doubt you will let me know otherwise), but it is one of those that is engraved on the memories of the English people, even though I was not alive when he said it.

 

After tomorrow’s votes on the Anglican Covenant in five more dioceses, we are likely to be able to feel they we have reached the end of the beginning. These are the five: if you are from any of these, and get any news of the vote, the rest of us would be extremely grateful if you would tweet, facebook or similarly broadcast it via carrier pigeon as the rest of us will be on tenterhooks.

Chester: time not known

Ely: time not known

Liverpool: 9.30-12.45

Norwich: time not known

St Albans: 9.30

 

It is interesting to speculate what effect the resignation of  the Archbishop of Canterbury is likely to have on the outcome. On the one hand, people might feel that they owe him a ‘yes’ vote as evidence of their loyalty. On the other hand, they may feel that if he is not to remain in office during the period when it will need to be implemented, it is not necessary to follow his lead and they will be free to vote according to their own views.

 

Meanwhile, we are all of us, the Archbishop included, climbing Jacob’s ladder:

Tags: , | Category: Anglican Communion, Anglican Covenant

10 Comments »
Posted by at 12:03

9th March 2012

Yes to the Anglican Communion; No to the Anglican Covenant

A new voice has joined in the debate on the Anglican Covenant, the ‘yes to the covenant‘ website. They have a page giving reasons why people should support the Covenant, among which is:

 “The Covenant is ‘the only game in town’ if the Church of England is to remain in any meaningful sense apart [sic] of the third largest world church. There is no alternative.  So the Church of England’s choices are to adopt the Covenant, or to disappear from the world’s radar as a significant voice in the world.”

 

Do you know the feeling when some thought or memory is bubbling away in your subconscious but  refuses to surface? It niggles away, sometimes for weeks or months.I have finally had that ‘Eureka!’ moment of remembering what all the statements by the Pro-Covenanters remind me of.

John Knox , a Hebrew Jeremiah set down on Scottish soil, sought to destroy what he felt was idolatry and to purify Scotland’s religion in a relentless campaign of fiery oratory :

“The sword of justice is God’s, and if princes and rulers fail to use it, others may.”

John Lloyd writes: There’s an old saying, which Scots still exchange with each other, usually humorously: “Aweel, ye ken noo” – well, you know now. It harks back to when Scots life was dominated by the stern Presbyterianism engrained into it by Calvin’s disciple, John Knox: when…’the Kirk’ policed the morals of society with enthusiastic rigour. “Well ye ken noo” was the generic cry of the godly to the un-godly, faced with the prospect of the fires of hell, having ignored the warnings of the faithful in a life of dissipation. On the left is a portrayal of John Knox admonishing Mary Queen of Scots, who looks suitably chastened and uncharacteristically subdued.

We have had a spate of attempts recently to crank up the guilt amongst those who would oppose the Covenant, partly at least because we do not believe it would have the beneficial effect that its proponents believe. Here is Bishop Gregory Cameron:

“The Bottom Line: Do we value the Communion?  Do we care enough to work together with our sister Churches?  Do we think that it is possible to describe what holds us together as Anglicans?  A “yes” to these questions is surely a “yes” to the Covenant.  A “No” to the Covenant says:  We can’t say what it means to be an Anglican, we want to be able to ignore our sister Churches when it suits us, and we won’t mind if up to half the Communion walks away.”

 

All three statements, the yes-to-the-covenant’s ‘only game in town’, John Knox’s ‘sword of justice’ and Bishop Gregory’s ‘ bottom line’ have one thing in common. They are examples of  False Dichotomy:

Definition: In false dichotomy, the arguer sets up the situation so it looks like there are only two choices. The arguer then eliminates one of the choices, so it seems that we are left with only one option: the one the arguer wanted us to pick in the first place. But often there are really many different options, not just two—and if we thought about them all, we might not be so quick to pick the one the arguer recommends.

Example: “Caldwell Hall is in bad shape. Either we tear it down and put up a new building, or we continue to risk students’ safety. Obviously we shouldn’t risk anyone’s safety, so we must tear the building down.” The argument neglects to mention the possibility that we might repair the building or find some way to protect students from the risks in question—for example, if only a few rooms are in bad shape, perhaps we shouldn’t hold classes in those rooms.

 

The first time I came across this alarming form of reasoning, which is difficult to answer because it is so sweeping, was in the novel of existential angst by Albert Camus, La Peste (The Plague), which was perhaps the equivalent for British teenagers of J D Salinger’s ‘The Catcher in the Rye’ in the 1960s. The priest, Father Paneloux, gives two sermons. The first is very much in John Knox Calvinist mode. The second asks the following:

“My brothers, a time of testing has come for us all. We must believe everything or deny everything. And who among you, I ask, would dare to deny everything?”

What happened to ‘Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief’?

 

So what does the Covenant really say, should you vote yes or should you vote no? Alan Perry (a Canadian archdeacon with a background in canon law, in case you do not already know his blog) has written tirelessly about every conceivable aspect of all four sections of the Covenant. Here he writes on ‘A Tale of Two Covenants’. And here he writes about the frequent problem that those who are in favour of the Covenant often seem to read into its text provisions which sound attractive but are not actually in the printed text.

The Revd Tobias Haller, an American priest, has also blogged at length about the Covenant, here on possible alternatives. He concludes: ‘the proposed Anglican Covenant is not the way forward for the Anglican Communion, either as a Communion, or for the sake of its members, or for our ecumenical relationships.’

Finally, in the words of Kelvin Holdsworth of the diocese of Glasgow and Galloway:

‘We don’t want the Covenant. We do want the Communion.’

◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊

The main illustration is of course the logo of the Anglican Communion. The stained glass portrayal of John Knox comes from the Covenant Presbyterian Church of Long Beach, California. And the photograph of Albert Camus was taken in 1957 and made available through a CCL.

Tags: , , , | Category: Anglican Communion, Anglican Covenant, Church of England

8 Comments »
Posted by at 20:54

7th March 2012

More Exciting Than Quidditch?

What are your plans for this Saturday? If you like to follow sport, you have a choice of watching  football (Coventry v Birmingham), golf (Florida), rugby union (Wales v Italy), swimming (Olympic trials) or tennis (Mexico). And I believe there are several games of quidditch around our universities.

But I have another suggestion. The most exciting spectator sport on offer this Saturday, 10 March 2012, is the Pro Anglican Covenant v Anti Anglican Covenant encounter being played out in another six diocesan synods across the land. These are exceptional times we live in – it has been said (rather rudely) that a deanery synod is a collection of people waiting to go home, and I have not heard that diocesan synods are any more gripping. But, if you have any imagination at all, this contest should have you on the edge of your seats with excitement.

Let us recap the current state of play (since we seem to be stuck in sporting metaphors). Voting on whether the Church of England should or should not adopt the Anglican Covenant has been rolling out in the dioceses since 12 March 2011 when (we hope prophetically) Wakefield rejected it. Since then, a further 20 dioceses have voted. The tally is currently 13 against the Covenant, 8 in favour.

I think it is probably fair to say that the results so far have been a great surprise to everyone. The Church of England hierarchy has certainly been taken aback by the strength of feeling in the country against it. The Archbishop of Canterbury saw fit to upload a video on 5 March in which his usual charm is nowhere to be seen. This feels like being reprimanded in the headmaster’s study:

In contrast, on 6 March Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch offered the following succinct summary of the arguments:

If I didn’t know better, I would say that the tone of Archbishop Rowan’s video indicates that he is running scared. I am reminded of  Mrs Thatcher’s taunt in 1983:

The Right Hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he?… Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn’t take it? Couldn’t stand it?  *

The significance is that if a simple majority of dioceses reject the Covenant, it will not be returned to York General Synod in July, as had been intended. There are 44 dioceses, which means that 23 dioceses must therefore vote in favour for it to continue. It cannot be brought forward again until July 2015, the end of the present quinquennium. Benny Hazlehurst has just blogged  about the voting so far throughout the Communion (as well as highlighting some of the arguments so far in England).

The dioceses voting on Saturday, then, are:

Ripon and Leeds 9.00 – 1.00

Bath and Wells 9.30 a.m.

Southwark  10.00 all day

Carlisle  10.30 a.m.

Coventry (not known)

Worcester (not known)

Results will be posted on Facebook at the No Anglican Covenant page, on Thinking Anglicans, and will be tweeted by Lesley Crawley (@RevdLesley) and me (@layanglicana). And then we go through it all over again on Saturday 17th with Norwich, Liverpool, St Albans, Chester and Ely.

 

This has been a David and Goliath struggle. The whole weight of the Church of England has been brought to bear on influencing the result, resorting to such tactics as ensuring that the only briefing material sent to dioceses was, so far as the hierarchy was able to do so, in favour of the Covenant. If David does indeed succeed in defeating Goliath, it will be thanks to the bravery of the clergy who stood firm for what they knew to be right despite jeopardising their positions. The story of the struggle needs one of the romantic poets of the nineteenth century to do it justice, Macaulay perhaps?

Then out spake brave Horatius,
The Captain of the gate:
‘To every man upon this earth
Death cometh soon or late.
And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods

◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊

*”Prime Minister’s Question Time, House of Commons (19 April, 1983). The use of ‘frit’, an unusual Lincolnshire dialect abbreviation of ‘frightened’ which Mrs Thatcher evidently recalled from childhood, was missed by MPs in a noisy chamber but heard very distinctly on the audio feed from the chamber” (Wikipedia)

 

The illustration is by iQoncept  via Shutterstock.

Tags: , , | Category: Anglican Communion, Anglican Covenant, Church of England

2 Comments »
Posted by at 19:07
« Newer Posts
Older Posts »
Blog Home
We rely on donations to keep this website running.

Copyright © 2013 layanglicana.org. All rights reserved.
Back to top