Lord Carey on the Roman Cat(holic) Among the Anglican Pigeons

In "Cause for Sadness and Celebration" for The Washington Post, Lord Carey, erstwhile and most recent Archbishop of Canterbury, gives his take on Pope Benedict's offer of a Roman Catholic 'Apostolic Constitution' for "Anglicans wishing to flee their own troubled shores."

I enjoy the way Lord Carey thinks and expresses himself. This on why we have this complicated Anglican predicament:

Historically, we have been a Church formed and shaped from a 'troika' of three traditions - evangelical, high church and liberal. Many evangelicals are now hiving off to the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans and refusing to have anything to do with the rest of the church. If Anglo-Catholics are wooed by Rome we could see the Church of England becoming a mainly liberal church, espousing little more than tolerance and liberality in all things; a kind of green party at prayer. Yes, the troika we have inherited has been, at times, a wild group of horses but, for myself, I would rather have that, than what we are likely to have if distinctive groups go their separate ways.

We do indeed live in uncertain times but I remain quite convinced that Anglicanism stands for something that is not quite caught by other traditions and, with respect, not even by Rome. That is to say, Catholic and Reformed. This has sometimes been put in the Latin tag: 'Ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda' (the Church reformed and constantly in need of reform). In faithful continuity to the past and yet open to all that God wishes to reveal to us through the fundamental sources of our faith, namely, the scriptures.

Our mess is a fine one, indeed.

All here.

McGrath, "Christianity's Dangerous Idea" and the Future of Protestant Denominations (like Anglican)

More Alister McGrath, Christianity’s Dangerous Idea: the Protestant Revolution—a history from the sixteenth century to the twenty-first (HarperOne, 2007)…from page 404 on the future of the Protestant denomination (which includes us Anglicans):

This often strong sense of belonging and commitment to the local congregation is rarely extended to the denomination as a whole, which is likely to be viewed as an inefficient and redundant bureaucracy that makes serious financial demands of local congregations while giving little in return.

A fourth factor that has been identified as of significance by sociologists with a particular interest in Protestant denominations is the rise of “lay liberalism,” which erases the clear boundaries separating believers from unbelievers. Where evangelicalism emphasizes the distinctiveness of Christianity, this pragmatic, laid-back lay liberalism feels able to renegotiate Christian moral and theological principles in the light of prevailing social norms. This has led to an erosion of the boundary between “church” and “world”—but also between Protestant denominations. Without clear “faith boundaries,” identification with any particular form of Protestantism—indeed, even with Christianity itself—becomes socially meaningless.

What Do Driveling Little Doodles Have To Do With Christianity's Dangerous Idea?

Reading Alister McGrath, Christianity’s Dangerous Idea: the Protestant Revolution—a history from the sixteenth century to the twenty-first (HarperOne, 2007)…from the public library, yet! Very good. Some bits that caught my eye:

Other nations might have been tempted to experiment with atheism or agnosticism in response to the religious intolerance and bigotry of the Puritan era. The English, however, decided to reinstate the Church of England instead, presumably believing that, for all intents and purposes, this amounted to more or less the same thing.

The same thing as atheism or agnosticism, that is. Hmmm. Does history repeat itself? He goes on:

Under Charles II, who reigned from 1660 to 1685, a decidedly docile form of Anglicanism emerged as the religion of the English establishment. The Church of England would be expected to be submissive to the expectations of the people and to keep its religious beliefs to itself rather than impose them on others. 142

Is there still the tendency to docile submissiveness to the spirit of the age and to keeping its beliefs to itself? I think so, alas. I do it myself.

On early protestantism in America

Whereas Massachusetts became a hotbed of Protestant religious experimentation, with generally secondary interests in commerce, southern colonies from Delaware to Georgia were primarily concerned with trade and saw religion as peripheral to this enterprise. It was an ideal context for Anglicanism to take root and flourish, primarily as the religion of the planting class. Long used to issues of social class and distinction, Anglicanism proved an ideal provider of a veneer of religious dignity to the social structures of the plantations that continued to the dawn of the nineteenth century. 154

Allowing our religion to be peripheral to our lives is still a hazard for Christians. So it devising a form of Anglicanism which merely provides a veneer of religious dignity to living and consuming like everyone else.

The problem with nineteenth century pastors

Who were seen by some as little more than “thin, vapid, affected, driveling little doodles.” 369

Ahem. I AM not thin.

Who Needs the Church! - Carlo Carreto

Who Needs the Church!

How baffling you are, O church, and yet
how I love you.
How you have made me suffer and yet
how much I owe you.
I should like to see you destroyed, and yet
I need your presence.
You have given me so much scandal and yet
you have made me understand sanctity.
I have seen nothing in the world
more devoted to obscurity,
more compromised, more false,
and I have touched nothing
more pure, more generous, more beautiful.
How often I have wanted to shut the doors
of my soul in your face, and how often
I have prayed to die in the safety of your arms.
No, I cannot free myself from you,
because I am you, although not completely.
Besides, where else could I go?

Good question and amen.

From Carlo Carreto, The God Who Comes, Orbis Books, via Readings for Reflection in A Guide to Prayer.

A Case For Faithful Anglican Staying

As is so often the case; ideas, opinions and thoughts about what concerns me float about in my mind "without form" until one day I come across something which crystalizes and settles them into a coherent form. This, from Philip Turner, Christopher Seitz and Ephraim Radner over at VirtueOnline, is such a something:

It is now the case that the people we know do not see any near possibility of reform and they no longer pursue such purposes. They have recognized the futility for near term of politically realistic change. However, they do hold certain convictions, and they do have certain commitments that give shape to their present actions-actions that hardly qualify as passive. These convictions and commitments are reflected in patient and enduring witness rather than in strategies and tactics designed to bring about desired future states. They grow from trust that God will use faithful witness in his own time and in his own way to bring about his purposes-purposes that do not stem from our imaginings or our desires but from God's justice and God's mercy.

This is where I now find myself

The experience of two General Synods have convinced me of how unlikely reform is in the Anglican Church of Canada and the futility of any attempts at Biblical or orthodox theological argument in the face of the well meaning but tragically mistaken revisionist tide. Yet this is the time and place into which God, in his wisdom, has called me.

So patient and enduring witness it is 

Turner, Seitz and Radner are committed to: 

witness rather than a strategy designed to bring about a desired future state. Our work is not to take this kingdom by force of design and tactic, but to make a faithful witness, practice faithful endurance, and wait upon the Lord to see what he will make of what we do and say.

Certainly my attempts at "design and tactic" have not been particularly fruitful in the wider church, or in my parish, for that matter.

I find I am strategically challenged, alas

I am, however, capable of faithful endurance. I don't much like it, but, with the Lord's help, it's doable. 

The whole piece here.

And not only that…

In a piece by Timothy Morgan of Christianity Today, one Russell Levenson Jr, Rector of the largest Episcopal church in the United States, explains why he and his parish are staying:

Daniel had to stay in Babylon, but did not abandon his faith. Jeremiah was not given another Israel. Ezekiel had to preach to the dry bones. When Jesus and his message were completely rejected, he did not leave. He wept. He stayed. He did not move on to Egypt. He stayed and faithfully preached when they believed and when they did not believe.

John Stott's Counsel

Levenson visited with John Stott recently. They talked and prayed about the challenges facing the Anglican Communion. When he asked Stott for his counsel, Stott said:

If I were you, I would stay … you have the truth on your side … and I think you are called to stay and faithfully preach the gospel. Remember what Max Warren said, 'the church is evidence of God's patience.' And we just don't know what fruit or reform will be born as a result of a long period of faithful preaching and witness to the evangelical faith we share.

Faithful staying, witness, endurance and preaching…

…while leaving the outcomes to the LORD are the order of the day for the likes of  Turner, Seitz, Radner and Levenson. Me, too, I guess.

O Lord, write these on my heart and may our faithfulness lead to Kingdom fruitfulness in the Anglican church. 

Read the whole interview with Levenson here.

St Eugene On the Challenges of Living in Community; Belonging to a Church, in Other Words

He just gets it so right every now and then:

Getting saved is easy; becoming a community is difficult—damnably difficult.

Vintage Eugene Peterson in Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places: A Conversation in Spiritual Theology, (Eerdman's, 2005), p250. To which I would add joining a community can be difficult, along with staying in it when you become disillusioned with it—which really is still becoming, I suppose.

Mr Bean Must Be Having a Really Good Day

Yesterday I led the Prayers of the People and I prayed for Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan ATKINSON (rather than Williams) without even noticing it.

What's more, the only people in the congregation who noticed and said anything were my wife and daughter-in-law!!!

Sigh.

I wonder if a Jacob/Esau thing happened in the heavenlies so Mr Bean is having a really good day today and is wondering why?

The Revisionist Dictionary: Parts 2 and 3

Some of my favourite gems from that naughty Irenaeus over at Stand Firm. From Part 2... 

EDUCATION FOR MINISTRY: Program by which lay people can learn the sophisticated unbelief taught in seminaries. “In his Education for Ministry lecture, Professor Monti explained that Jesus is ‘a bag of bones rotting outside Jerusalem.’”

EVANGELICAL: Low Church reactionary.

EVANGELIZE: To propagate triumphalism*.

EXEGESIS: Drawing from a text the meaning it should include. “To discern the Sophia* subtext of Colossians 1:15-20, we must employ a deeper*, more rigorous exegesis.” See also Eisigesis.

The rest of Part 2 is here.

Part 3 goodies:

LECTIONARY: System by which we avoid reading unhelpful* parts of the Bible*.

MARRIAGE: Social institution for the oppression of women and the liberation of LGBTQA persons.

MORMONS: Their numbers grow while ours shrink because we are smarter.

More Part 3 here.

The Revisionist Dictionary: Part 1

...over at Stand Firm...some wee gems...

ANGLICAN CHURCH OF CANADA: Second most enlightened member church of the Anglican Communion.

BIBLE: Collection of ancient patriarchal texts available for reinterpretation, contextualization, deconstruction, ridicule, and selective use. Subordinate to canons (2)*.

BIBLIOLATRY: Worship of the Bible*; believing that the Bible has greater authority than the Constitution and Canons (2)* of the Episcopal Church. “If we exalt scripture as the supreme, preemptive authority, we may well be guilty of bibliolatry” (D.C.).

BOX: Container into which the Orthodox put God. “If you stake the gospel on Christ’s bodily Resurrection*, you put God in a very small box.” Because Progressive reason is liberating*, Progressive beliefs do not similarly confine God.

BOY: Small, disruptive, potentially patriarchal human in need of domestication.

CHURCH GROWTH CONSULTANT: Explains why your congregation does well by shrinking more slowly than others.

Read the rest here.

Seinfeld and Philosophy

Reading Seinfeld and Philosophy: a Book About Everything and Nothing, (ed. William Irwin, Open Court, 2000). I'm not much of a philosopher, but I enjoy Seinfeld.

William Irwin, the editor, contributes an essay entitled, "Kramer and Kierkegaard: Stages on Life's Way." Now there's a juxtaposition of names and world-views! Irwin writes about the passion and "the absurdity and difficulty involved in making the leap of faith" into Kierkegaard's "religious stage" of life (a leap Kramer never makes, by the way). This sentence caught my eye:

The early Church Father Tertullian said, "I believe because it is absurd." p56

There's a fair amount of that kind of absurdity rattling around the Anglican world just now, only it's not particularly funny.

Yadda, yadda.