From an editorial in today’s [UK] Church Times, which "detect[s] signs that weariness is descending over the battlefield" (hat tip to TitusOneNine commenter "John Henry"):
AS THE DUST settles on the Primates’ Meeting, its significance is becoming
clear. The communiqué, with its assurance that the Primates met "with Christian
charity and abundant goodwill", already looks fanciful. In the past week, the
Primates of Uganda and Rwanda have made statements to the effect that no new
debate is needed on the subject of homosexuality. The Primate of the Southern
Cone flew straight to a rally of dissenting parishes in New Westminster,
Canada. Another Primate reported that conservative colleagues had been boasting
of their ability to make Dr Williams do as they wanted.What continues to shock churchpeople most, however, is the account of how
the Primates from the global South were unwilling to attend eucharistic
celebrations with the North Americans. Their stance was consistent with having
announced themselves out of communion with the US and Canadian provinces after
the consecration of an openly gay bishop and the blessing of same-sex unions.
Nevertheless, their decision calls into question the very use of the term
"Communion" for the Anglican Churches.
Eucharistic hospitality is at the core of Anglicanism. The Thirty-Nine
Articles tell us not to be perturbed by the unworthiness of the ministers. If,
as the Primates seem to have done, we start to calculate the unworthiness of
our fellow communicants, altar rails around the world would be empty (unless,
of course, we also calculate our own unworthiness). When we consider the
Primates’ representative function, and their task of uniting the Church, the
implications seem graver still.All this has had a profoundly depressing effect on those committed to
the Anglican enterprise. Liberals are naturally dismayed that sympathy for a
broader interpretation of scripture is no longer being expressed openly. Many
conservatives, supposedly reassured by the outcome in Newry, have concerns over
too many other matters, such as women’s ordination, to feel secure with what
they term the "revisionist" hierarchy. Those who disagree with such labels are
simply alarmed that Anglican leaders seem to have lost the ability to live in
charity with those who hold different theological views.We detect signs that weariness is descending over the battlefield. It takes
more effort to live in dialogue with others than it does to settle into a club
of the like-minded. . . .
Leave a Reply