A Thinking Reed

"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed" – Blaise Pascal

As the Anglican Communion turns…

The election of Katharine Jefferts Schori as Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church continues to reverberate. Taken not only as a ratification of women priests and bishops, but as a ratification of the election of V. Gene Robinson, an openly non-celibate gay man, to the episcopacy, the election of Bishop Schori seems to have pushed the Anglican Communion to the tipping point.

Conservative parishes and dioceses in the U.S. are seeking “alternative oversight” from conservative African bishops, and liberal clergy in England are seeking oversight from liberal bishops in America.

And now, the Nigerian Anglican church, headed by Archbishop Peter Akinola, is drawing up plans for an alternative conference to the planned 2008 Lambeth Conference, (the meeting of the heads of the various national churches in the Anglican communion which represents the most authoritative organ of the communion as I understand it) to be organized and led by the churches of the Global South. This looks for all the world like an attempt to sideline the churches of the US, Canada, and England and to claim the Anglican “brand” for the churches of the Global South.

Is this the way all our denominations are going to go? A realignment along ideological, rather than national, lines?

8 responses to “As the Anglican Communion turns…”

  1. Lutheran Zephyr

    My friend Derek, who blogs over at haligweorc thinks so, but I don’t. Sure, we Lutherans and other traditions have our internal struggles, but I think that a divide like that of the Episcos is possible only because of their polity – they can have a few bishops run to Africa and take their congregations with them. We Lutherans have a congregational polity, and no bishop can just change the denominational identity of 100s of congregations with one move. We might have a choking apathy towards the national church and strident ideological differences, but we are not at the brink of a grand schism like that of our Episcopalian brethren.

    (In an odd way, this issue represents the kind of episcopal authority that Word Alone feared – the power of a Bishop to do x, y or z in large or some part on their own authority. Of course, many Word Aloners are probably sympathetic to the conservative African and Network bishops, but this kind of polity and power grab is what Word Alone feared liberals might do and what might creep into the Lutheran Church. I don’t share Word Alone’s conservative bent, but I do share their concerns about episcopal polity – this schism in the anglican communion is a perfect example of what can happen in a system of highly centralized power.).

    Reply
  2. Lee

    I think you may be on to something there LZ. I notice that the Presbyterians have recently settled on a “local option” for addressing the issue of gay clergy, something which their decentralized polity seems to be able to accomodate fairly easily. Not a perfect response maybe, but it might enable cooperation on mission and service while allowing congregations to follow their consciences.

    I’m willing to see the Historic Episcopate as a useful instrument of unity in the church, but I’ve always been suspicious of claims that it’s necessary (apostolic succession, etc.).

    Reply
  3. Chris T.

    Is this the way all our denominations are going to go? A realignment along ideological, rather than national, lines?

    It certainly feels that way, but I have at least some hope that the Spirit will thwart that kind of division. It would be disastrous for the whole church…

    Reply
  4. Gaius

    Hmm. You mean like the Reformation?

    Reply
  5. Lee

    In some ways it’s the opposite of the Reformation, at least insofar as the Reformation was a kind of nationalist revolt against Roman (“internationalist”) hegemony.

    Reply
  6. Johann Cornelius

    I agree with Lutheran Zephyr’s observation that polity matters. That’s not to say that we may not suffer schismatic threats in the ELCA over doctrine, hermeneutics, or practice, but I expect to see very different dynamics than what we see among the Anglicans these days. As a rule, Anglican bishops seem to possess far more authority to act unilaterally than do our bishops, and I now suspect that some of those bishops may be taking advantage of the turmoil in their Communion to enhance their own influence and to expand their episcopal authority from local to global oversight. I’m thinking of Peter Akinola, Archbishop of Lagos, in particular. His proposal to supplant the traditional role of the Lambeth Conference with a competing conference of Anglican bishops under the auspices of the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa, suggests that he is directly challenging the role of the Archbishop of Canterbury as “first among equals” and advancing his own vision of a more authoritative “papal” leader for the Anglican Communion.

    While I appreciate and support the practice of episcopal succession as a sign of historic continuity in the catholic and apostolic church, I think we done good to insist that (1) it is not essential to Christian faith and practice, and (2) that our bishops’ authority and tenure remain prudently limited. Episcopal mischief in the Anglican style seems unlikely.

    As for the question of ideological versus national alignment in our denominations: when have we not been ideologically aligned? Think ELCA versus LC-MS, which suggests both ideological and national alignment at the same time. Still, if we do suffer schism, no doubt home-grown ideological differences (which I understand to mean our positions on doctrine, hermeneutics, and practice), but not foreign interference, will drive it.

    Reply
  7. Joshie

    Part of the problem with what the Africans and conservatives are doing (besides the African churches’ dubious human rights records) is that if they cease to be in communion with Canterbury, they cease to be Anglican in any visible way. So if they form this alternative group, they will have to keep being involved with the Lambeth conference if they want to remain Anglican in anything other than spirit.

    So I don’t see anything really coming out of this. If they split, they lose their whole raison d’etre.

    Reply
  8. Camassia

    I don’t see what’s so great about churches being divided along national lines. One product of the Reformation was the shift of power from pope to princes, which I don’t think was a net gain for the common folk. But even apart from that, nations keep appearing and disappearing and people keep moving. This is why the Eastern Orthodox have patriarchs presiding over areas that are nearly all Muslim, and only a minority of Orthodox Americans belong to the national church.

    There’s also the fact that most African states, including Nigeria, are somewhat arbitrary colonial creations. Nigeria may well not exist in 100 years, which would be a blow to the power of its archbishop.

    Reply

Leave a comment