What Reform stands for is too counter-cultural to earn garlands from a compromised church and a politically-correct world. So anyone wanting to stand firm for the classic evangelical convictions Reform stands for can kiss good-bye to that purple shirt or Birthday Honour.
Which is one reason why we should thank God for the spiritual courage of those men and women who do volunteer to serve on the Council.
Reform chairman Rod Thomas says the Council decided not to form a Society purely for the purpose of providing episcopal oversight for those opposed to women bishops because
the effect might be to marginalise us. We needed to show that we occupied, and argued our case from, the middle ground.
Below the news story about this on this blog Ugley Vicar Revd John Richardson pointed out that Reform is already institutionally marginalised in the Church of England. Evidence: one Reform bishop appiointed since the network formed in 1993 and he a suffragan of Lewes, the Rt Revd Wallace Benn.
Who can argue with the prophet Richardson on that? But just because Reform is institutionally marginalised does not mean that what it stands for is marginal in terms of what the living God is doing in his world - building his Kingdom through the transforming power of the true biblical gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.
So why worry about the institutional 'middle ground'? It may constitute a raised platform at the centre of the pond. But below the surface and indeed increasingly above it, the wood is rotten to the core.
That is why it makes sense to build a fishing platform adjacent to the rotting one that is firmly established on the Reform Covenant. It may not be as fancy. But there are some nice people on the rotting one who are willing to lend a supporting hand, just as they are for the Anglo-Catholics who are building a SSWSH platform.
A fishing platform with the Reform Covenant as its basis has the significant advantage of being theologically coherent on the male headship issue unlike one built on the Jerusalem Declaration.
Who is the rather grave looking character just about to deliver a serious sermon on the front of the new Reform website? It might not have been intended that way, but it's not exactly an incentive to explore the rest of the site, which has some very useful material on it.
ReplyDeleteAt least both the Prophet Richardson and the Curate agree on the futility of the St Augustine route. What dissent is there in a broad brush approach that tries to involve all, by not talking about their differences?
However, we have only ourselves to blame for only getting one bishop appointed since 1993. How many evangelicals actually want to be bishops? Quite rightly, they prefer pastoral ministry to the murky business of church politics.
Julian
ReplyDeleteAs a non-conformist free evangelical that has strayed into a (to some extent)conservative evangelical Anglican church, what puzzles me is that you conservative evangelical Anglicans spend so much time talking about the bishops and the hierarchy.
You seem to regard such an authority structure as being an essential part of how a church should be run, and then say - indirectly - how useless many of the bishops are. If you are true episcopalians, you should either accept the decisions of the hierarchy, including female bishops, gay vicars and, worst of all, the denial of God's plan of salvation, or get out of the CofE altogether.
In practice, you do neither of these things, regarding the Anglican Church as being "the best boat to fish from", and behaving like congregationalists within an episcoplalian structure. That is not an unreasonable position, but it means that you should not be campaigning for more conservative evangelical bishops, but rather for more congregationalism. Even if episcopalianism was the better model - and I think it cannot be in a Protestant church - you have no chance of getting even half of the bishops coming from a conservative evangelical background. So campaigning to move the power away from the hierarchy and towards the individual church - towards congregationalism - is likely to be more productive. Or do you think that your Baptist brethren are really missing out by not having archdeacons, bishops and the rest of the life-sapping paraphernalia?
Julian, please, please explain your understanding of these issues. I am on the edge of leaving my church, because I just can't stand the two-facedness of Anglican Evangelicals, as we bankrupt ourselves to support a bishop who is commonly regarded as a liberal catholic.
Sorry about all the labels
Yours desperately
David
David Waters
Thank you Sir - I would warmly recommend that you don't leave your local church assuming it is one where the gospel is being preached and the Bible taught.
ReplyDeletePersonally I do not believe that congregationalism is the best form of church government. It seems to me healthy that the minister should have a degree of independence from the church, so I favour a connectional form of governance. This seems to allow scope for churches to be turned around.
I tend to agree with David Holloway that in a connectional church offering ministers a degree of independence, a bishop works better than a committee in providing oversight and accountability.
Unfortunately it is not just the opposition to women bishops that makes an 'evangelical' a 'persona non grata' in some quarters. Rather I think, it is something to with standing unashamedly foursquare on scripture. That means falling foul of some of the politically correct thinking on family life, sex and sexuality and sin. Clear Gospel preaching and teaching is in short supply, not just in the C of E but also in the Methodist church and the URC among others. As for the shortage of evangelicals in the 'hierarchy' - I do not think that I would have been made Rural Dean without being voted in by the Deanery Chapter as was the tradition in this Diocese. It certainly gave a platform in Deanery Synod as well as in the twice yearly meetings of Rural Deans with the Bishops of the Diocese.
ReplyDeleteYou are right in saying that congregationalism is not necessarily the best form of church governance. A faithful evangelical minister could so easily be voted out for dealing with unpopular biblical teaching!
Every blessing on your ministry
Terry
Congregationalism is obviously a most excellent and efficacious approach to being church. In those denominations which practice it I find what appears to be an almost zealous anti-clericalism to match what generally appears to be an extremely nominal, social gospel ridden faith.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with letting the lunatics run the asylum and endorsing the taking of 'more gentle" paths (as one of the local church leaders puts it) is that we have a limp Gospel. This is often redressed of course by the many 'non conformist' types who, especially in the evangelical format appear to be at the other extremes with predestination and a healthy view of hell and who's in!
The reality is that we do need some Reform type bishops (not that I'd agree with them on everything they thought I'm sure) because we need balance and that is obviously not present (Forward in Faith members feel the same as CC).
Equity, justice, mercy and a bit of even-handedness within the CofE would serve the whole CofE, and the evangelicals, in a much better and balanced way.
Sorry - bit of a rushed ramble - on way out . . .
VtV
Julian,
ReplyDeleteHow, in your opinion, would your average potential Reform bishop cope with any of the following?
(1) Wearing Eucharistic vestments (plus or minus mitre).
(2) Celebrating the Eucharist with unleavened bread.
(3) Celebrating the Eucharist with the use of incense.
(4) Having responsibility for the spiritual oversight of a parish which does any or all of the above.
(5) Having responsibility for the spiritual oversight of a parish with a woman vicar.
(6) Giving or withholding permission for the reservation of the Sacrament. [You may or may not know that reservation has been found at law in the C of E's ecclesiastical courts to be legal.]
(7) Leading the full range of the C of E's authorised services, including every authorised eucharistic prayer in Common Worship Order One.
Everything I have enumerated here is definitely legal in the Church of England, and I believe that the reason there are not more Reform-type bishops is that there is a perception that such men would make real nuisances of themselves over some or all of the above. You, as a Reform man, will know better than I, who am not, how far this perception is justified; but I would find it very difficult to argue against those who think it is.
I'd be most interested to hear what you think.