A Christian Eye on Politics
There have been suggestions of it for years but the Church of England is now actually very close to splitting into two bodies, one liberal, the other traditional/evangelical.
On July 7th 2008, the Church of England's ruling General Synod voted to consecrate women as bishops despite deep and voluminous protests from evangelicals and traditionalists within Anglicanism.
A divisive row over homosexuality had already left the worldwide Anglican Communion facing one of its worst ever crises, to the point where there was talk of an irrevocable schism, but the acceptance of allowing women to the office of bishop looked to be the final straw. Moreover, the vote in favour of women bishops was finally carried with few of the guarantees or provisos having been put into place which might have kept the traditionalists maybe disgruntled but nevertheless basically onboard; this inconsiderate haste has caused deep anger and resentment which could have been avoided. In official statements, both the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church (the two other branches of orthodox Christianity), were surprisingly quick to condemn the Anglican Synod's decision. Both bodies view the concept of female bishops as completely unbiblical and as simply a very obvious compromise with modern social trends. As Jennifer Gold reported in Christian Today,
'The Vatican Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity said that it had "regretfully" learned of the Church of England's vote. The Roman Catholic Church opposes women bishops on the basis that Jesus appointed only men to be his apostles.
In a statement released on Tuesday, the Council said: "Such a decision signifies a breaking away from the apostolic tradition maintained by all of the churches since the first millennium and is a further obstacle for reconciliation between the Catholic Church and the Church of England."
In late June, a conference in Jerusalem, with some 300 Anglican conservative bishops and archbishops in attendance had already announced the creation of a new Anglican grouping which will no longer recognise the authority of the traditional Anglican leader, the Archbishop of Canterbury. The current Archbishop, Dr Rowan Williams, although considered firmly within the liberal camp, had been attempting to walk a tightrope for many months but it now looks as though Rowan Williams will be the Archbishop of Canterbury who will preside over the denomination's final split into two bodies.
The conservatives, who criticise liberal attitudes towards homosexuality and the "spiritual decline" in the West, are currently proposing a new council of primates, formed of five African and one South American clergy to become its highest authority but, until the dust settles, it is impossible to be certain how the new grouping will shape up; however, there is no doubt that numerous conservatives within Anglicanism now want a firm and decisive break and feel that this could be a very good time. While division is always sad, they are nevertheless to be commended for this, for since they themselves firmly hold to the maintenance of biblical Christianity, in order to be consistent they must reject the entire concept of a liberal Anglicanism which simply represents compromise with prevalent modern attitudes such as cultural liberalism, moral relativity and religious pluralism.
While there have been liberal/conservative tensions within the Church of England for at least a century, the present serious crisis seems to have been initiated by incidents within the American Episcopal Church. When Gene Robinson, a quite openly gay American priest, was ordained as bishop of New Hampshire in 2003, repercussions were surely inevitable. This was in the wake of the ordination of Barbara Harris as the US church's first female bishop in 1989. The first women priests in the Church of England were ordained in 1994, but the possibility of the office of bishop becoming open to both sexes was always going to be a major battle ground. Many conservatives and evangelicals (now undoubtedly in the majority within the Anglican communion), are now determined to hold the ground against further unbiblical compromises; they are saying to the liberals (who now seem to be a somewhat reducing minority of perhaps 40% of Anglicanism): if you want further compromises, you will need a separately-organised liberal church, for we won't be coming with you.
In all of this current mess within the Church of England one occasionally hears comments from liberal Anglicans to the effect that it is the evangelicals who are causing division and - to the unconverted, non-Christian eye - it looks that way, but the truth is that it is liberal Christianity which has sought full accommodation with worldliness and which has so pathetically compromised its former passion and zeal which has caused the division. Does it really never occur to some of these tragically myopic compromisers that the Church was never intended to be a secular society which exists to simply and meekly follow the ethical and moral fads and fashions of changing society but that its whole purpose is to stand on the eternal truth claims of a certain Jesus Christ?
The Christian Hawk, July 9th, 2008.