The Anglican Dust-Up

Reflecting on the recent meeting of Anglican Primates in England, the Archbishop of Canterbury wrote, "Some have said unity is worthless if achieved at the expense of justice; others have urged unity is a false prize if it undermines truth.  Both of the views misunderstand the nature of the Church...a body of people committed to each other because they are followers of Jesus Christ... We looked at each other across our deep and complex differences -- and we recognised those we saw as those with whom we are called to journey in hope towards the truth and love of Jesus Christ.  It was our unanimous decision to walk together and to take responsibility for making that work."

So far, so good.  Then, immediately following this solid portion of the statement, he recounts how the Episcopal Church is being punished for her belief in marriage equality. Canada, which is close by with us on the issue, was only threatened. We alone were singled out for exclusion from an active role in the Anglican Communion for three years.  This decision results in part from the rapid growth of Christianity in the sub-Saharan world, most of whose bishops and archbishops exercise an autocratic model of church government, hold conservative opinions' and they have constituted a majority of the primates for several years.  In my opinion, the imposition of punitive measures betrays a fundamental misunderstanding and disregard for both the nature of Anglicanism and the nature of our Communion.

First, Anglicanism was born in the English Reformation, which was principally a constitutional, not theological, reform.  The Church moved to end Papal tyranny and the financial rape of England.  But She retained the essential faith, order, worship, and discipline of the ancient Catholic Church whilst reforming what really needed to be fixed --  distortions like denying the Chalice to laity, forbidding marriage to clergy, and worshipping in a dead language.  By contrast, the Continental Reformation was theological, inventing new articles of faith and innovations in church government, worship, and discipline.  That is tossing out baby with bathwater.  Within certain parameters, Anglicans tolerate a wide range of theological and liturgical preferences.  Diversity for us is a strength, not a weakness, and we must remain open to intellectual enquiry and assimilation of new truth. It is not condign that Anglicans should punish a national church for her theological convictions.

 Second, our Communion is a federation of independent national churches.  There is no magisterium. There is no infallible centre.  There is no juridical authority, in Lambeth or elsewhere, standing above and judging a constituent national church.  Hence to issue a declaration of punishment is to violate the integrity of the Episcopal Church as a member of our international Communion of eighty-million Christians.  On one occasion, a bishop friend of mine observed that, right after the American Revolution, we were a validly-constituted Catholic body in apostolic succession, independent, and in communion with no one, and that we could be that again.  Communion leaders should take heed.