Orthodox, Evangelical and Lambeth

[Phil Weickhardt (Phool)]

It is very heartening to read +Roger's charge to the Perth Synod. Thank you Brian Porter for bringing it to the Forum's attention.

Much challenging stuff and things that I may not have agreed with 20 years ago as an "abrasive" evangelical.

I would commend it to all who have time to read it: http://www.perth.anglican.org/admin/?getfile=1882

He is clearly pointing to the centrality of Christ's atoning death and sacrifice. He issues some great challenges for our pastoral ministry to fellow sinners that we may not agree with.

Conversion to Christ through his atoning death and resurrection, our transforming life in the
Spirit, our deep love for the Scriptures, the Sacraments and the Church, our obedience to
living lives that are edifying and pleasing in God’s eyes, our hope in the resurrection of the
body, life eternal, and Christ’s coming in glory to be the final judge, form part of our essential
make-up.

Lambeth Conference 1978: Resolution 10 Human Relationships and Sexuality
The Conference gladly affirms the Christian ideals of faithfulness and chastity both within and
outside marriage, and calls Christians everywhere to seek the grace of Christ to live lives of
holiness, discipline, and service in the world,

I find that he has also made Lambeth 2008 accessible and is cautiously welcoming of FOCA. I believe that he (fairly) criticises those on both sides of some current debates.

He will never be a complimentarian (if that is important).

I think it is a "middle stump" view of Anglicanism (using Mark Burton's phrase), which may be helpful for evangelicals to be cognisant of.

[Alex Milner]

Hi Phil,

It's a rather classic (Anglican) debating technique to define and "seize" the middle ground to make a position look more appealing, "balanced" and reasonable, and I think that's what Herft is doing in his speech. It a bit like saying someone looks "middle" church because he/she does not hold (albeit tolerates) the extreme "liberal" views of the Dean of Perth.

The giveway is the imbalance in the criticism of each of the sides and the objective - to convince everyone that all will be well so long as we all keep talking, which is just what TEC wants.

Notice how TEC and Canada were merely impolite "by proceeding to act in what they perceive to be a prophetic manner, [and had] become so focussed on their own cultural context that they were unable to recognise the consequences of their pre-emptive actions on the Communion at large. Pleadings for restraint were dismissed without sufficient consideration."

Whereas the orthodox response is far more sinister: "The current Church leaders in Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya and Rwanda, some of whom have received an education in Britain, see the position of the Archbishop of Canterbury as a symbol of the Old Empire. Add to that mix, Anglicanism influenced strongly by the ultrapuritan version of the Christian faith, and you have a combination of forces in which realignment becomes more than a deconstruction of the Old Empire. It is seen as a divinely sanctioned fulfilment of the Reformation (beyond even its continental expressions), to the creation of a “pure” church which no longer can legitimately claim that “all are welcome”. While all in the Global South may not discern this radicalism, it is what motivates those who see no place for an Anglican Church which is comprehensive and generous in spirit, where truth and unity converge in the mystery of the Cross – the place where God’s costly, willing hospitality is most evident. This is an attack on a church willing to allow the one with absolute certainty to sit alongside the doubter, the explorer, the curious, the apathetic and the agnostic."

There is also:

- the (false) equivalency between heresy and the "border crossings" in response (the Windsor Report did not make them equivalent, nor as a matter of principle are they equivalent)
- the curious reference to no "public" rite of blessing of same-sex relationships being authorised in Australia, which again is a TEC spin on the intent of the Dar Es Salaam Communique (ie TEC argue "public" rites are under moratorium, but "private" rites are not restricted)
- the rather amusing comment regarding orthodox interventions: "Judgements on matters of primary faith and belief also flounder, given that the orthodoxy of bishops who have faced interventions has never been questioned."
- and the portrayal of those opposed to same sex blessings et al as closed minded: "It would appear from the current rhetoric and stand-off that in the minds of some study of such questions is no longer permissible."

And finally, there's the elephant in the room that's not mentioned: the active and intentional persecution of orthodox congregations in the USA and Canada, the extensive use of litigation against orthodox lay members of the church, and the purported depositions of orthodox bishops.

But otherwise it's a great piece of "balanced" writing.

Kind regards
Alex

[Phil Weickhardt (Phool)]

Alex,

I am not sure whether I have become a big fan of +Roger because he is so different to strident liberals or because he is biblical and balanced.

This is only as it should be, for it is the Christian faith that acknowledges that we have all
“sinned and fallen short of God’s glory” (Romans 3:23). We acknowledge that sin against
another, even if it is unwitting, is a sin against God (Psalm 51:4); that godly grief leads to true
repentance. In Jesus Christ the righteous, the perfect offering, all scapegoating is brought
to an end, we are forgiven and walk forward in newness of life. This is a great statement about the atoning sacrifice which I do not hear in liberal theology.

I also find that he grapples with the social justice issues which evangelicals "ignored" (in the words of John Stott). So my early evangelical experience looked at "gospel" christians and "social justice" christians, in my time at University with links to AFES, much the same way as I note a debate these days on egalitarian vs complementarian. The "social justice" christians were looked down on by evangelicals as proclaiming the truth was the more important thing to do. I described myself as an "abrasive" evangelical (past tense) because I held that view. I now believe that we proclaim the truth most effectively by living it.

The Mission Plan seeks to provide some structure, offer some models, encourage
partnerships and enable every baptised person to be effective pray-ers, listeners, tellers,
connectors. We are to be living pointers to what God has done and is doing in our midst to
bring love, salvation and abundant life to us and to our world in Jesus Christ. It is very interesting to hear +Roger talk about the difference between a busy knitting needle, doing good work, and a compass needle that points the way. He seeks to "point the way" in his own life based on what a family member exhorted him to do.

Study of Scripture in an atmosphere of prayer is an essential feature in the Christian
community. The enabling of lay and ordained to read, mark, learn and inwardly digest the
holy Scripture must always be a part of the life of our worshipping communities, schools and
agencies.
The way we read, understand and interpret the Scriptures continues to cause tension and
disagreement. Lambeth Conferences over the decades have outlined the unique way in
which Anglicans approach Scripture. I have seen "christian" communities where the ordained leaders have acknowledged to lay people that the lay people have a better grasp of scripture. Roger has restored scripture to a higher place in Perth, although possibly not the view as high as others may like.

In our local context in Perth we have sought to create greater understanding by building
healthy relationships with leaders and adherents of other religions. We need to work
together for the common good of society and the world, while holding to the revelation of God
in Christ as unique and universal. Roger is not pluralistic, nor liberal, if he believes Christ to be unique. It may be useful to note that he appears to be strategically transforming a liberal diocese into biblical thinking.

Conversion to Christ through his atoning death and resurrection, our transforming life in the
Spirit, our deep love for the Scriptures, the Sacraments and the Church, our obedience to
living lives that are edifying and pleasing in God’s eyes, our hope in the resurrection of the
body, life eternal, and Christ’s coming in glory to be the final judge, form part of our essential
make-up.
How we hold the one who stands firm on the Rock, and the other who wishes to explore the
existence, purpose and shape of the Rock, in a common bond of communion in Christ, is a
real challenge in an age where such excursions for discerning truth are seen as a betrayal of
the fundamentals. Roger speaks very openly about conversion and other primary matters. It is on this basis that I describe him as orthodox. I see scriptural orthodoxy a beautiful thing in this current age.

I see his views on homosexuality to be thoroughly biblical: outside of marriage people are required to be chaste, but ALL have sinned. How do we most effectively minister to sinners?

Roger has been very interested in GAFCON and supported the attendance by two from Perth Diocese
In such a time as this we need to create places for conversations to take place with respect
for the other. We will have an opportunity at this Synod to hear the bishops speak of how the
Lambeth Conference affected them. I hope there will be an opportunity to hear about
GAFCON, and how in the midst of these tensions we may seek to work constructively
together in God’s mission.

[Alex Milner]

Hi Phil,

I don't want to suggest Roger has no good qualities or to categorise/label him. I am glad to hear the good things you mention him doing.

The purpose of my post was to:
- point out that the speech he gave is not as balanced (whatever that means) as you gave it credit and had some serious deficiencies; and
- query the usefulness of 'balance' as a measure of the merits of a position on an issue.

I suspect we are so conditioned to Bishop-speak being pretty ordinary that we're overjoyed with those few utterances that might resemble something biblical. But are our standards (as opposed to our expectations) really that low?

Saying that evangelicals haven't always got it right, or that my [AFES Group/Navigators/ insert previous youthful experience here] wasn't perfect has no logical bearing on whether someone else's position is correct or better. Both positions might be thoroughly wrong (and perhaps not extreme/abrasive enough!). Of course we can learn from others (both as a model and a warning), but it is a logical fallacy to believe that the truth always lies in the midpoint between two different views (who's views for starters?), especially on matters of principle (or doctrine).

There was an interesting interview with JI Packer recently and one of the questions was how TEC became so stridently liberal. To summarise a much longer answer, his view was that modern day liberals within the TEC were the logical decendants not of the evangelicals or of the Oxford movement, but rather the 'middle' church who tried to hold it all together against the "extremes" (refer (http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1425923607/bclid1527697281/bctid1825926534. )

The danger with a supposed "middle stump" position is that it's not actually based upon sound biblical principle/doctrine.

Kind regards
Alex

[Phil Weickhardt (Phool)]

Thanks for the discussion Alex,

What is heartening is to hear +Roger openly describe a conversion experience under the ministry of CMS. This is not in the Synod charge but he does recognise the work of "ABM, BCA and CMS". He also has enabled BCA to assist in the Wheatbelt region of WA since his election. I saw BCA excised from the Diocese of Perth in the 1990s, as a supporter of BCA I nearly wept.

As Archbishop he has a public ministry and has to "toe the party line" as well. Hopefully his line will continue to inform Anglicans in Perth about GAFCON and FCA (which he has done) and encourage biblical mission. Unfortunately we had a debate in "The West Australian" newspaper a few years ago about "What does it mean to be Anglican?" A biblical worldview was not mentioned.

As I see it +Roger is trying the convert Perth Anglicans to Christianity!