Seeing the Forest… from the trees

In the next step in the saga of the Episcopal church in the US, it appears that they are pushing ahead with the consecration of openly gay bishops. Read about it here. What seems particularly interesting in all of this, is that the Episcopal church is claiming that the innovators, those guilty of schism are those who are separating from them. The people who are separating are those who want to hold to the more traditional Anglican beliefs.

What seems to be at work here is the belief that the core of Anglicanism is finding the via media, the ‘middle way’. We see two different versions of Anglicanism, one which seeks to find the middle way and one which seeks to hold to traditional teaching. In my diocese, the diocese of Melbourne, I am aware that both views of Anglicanism are present. One of the mantras of the diocese is that we are a diverse diocese.

The struggle I have with the mantra of diversity is, how far does it go? There is a need for a diversity of opinions, and freedom of conviction on a range of issues. However if we refuse to articulate some core values (other than diversity itself) it becomes incredibly hard to work out what the Anglican church is, apart from an historic alliance of disparate groups.

Surely the doctinal traditions found in the 39 articles and foundations of the prayer book would be the most useful place to begin.

As far as the Episcopal church goes, their vote seems to be a profound failure to listen to the groups within the Anglican communion, and even many churches within their own organisation. To ignore the calls for restraint and press ahead, touting Anglicanism as ‘the middle way’ is deeply saddening. The Anglican tradition has far richer views of the authority of scripture that are not simply compromise with every innovation.

Similarly we may well talk about multiculturalism being a value in our culture, but at some point we need to articulate things that we do value. We see the Australian government attempting to wrestle with this in the paper ‘Freedom of Religious Belief in the 21st Century’. Andrew Cameron provides some great reflections on this here.

Ultimately the tough question really is, how can you both stand for that which you believe to be true (and hence against false teaching) and continue to be a gracious peacemaker?

I suspect the heart of this remains following the risen Lord Jesus and prayerfully considering each step. I pray that we all receive great wisdom in the times ahead.

Peter Sellick has written a great article on the trouble with Liberalism. Although liberalism is nothing new, these beliefs are more than alive and well today. His conclusion speaks for itself.

‘The besetting sin of Liberal Protestantism is that it has mistaken the grace of God to mean that nothing is asked of the believer and that almost any moral position can be defended. As Dietrich Bonheoffer pointed out many years ago this is cheap grace that costs nothing and therefore leads to nothing. Cheap grace means that no attempt is required of the believer to amend his life, the call of the gospel may be “come as you are” but certainly does not mean “remain as you are”.’