Matthew's Journal

Recent going on in the Anglican communion have caused an old rant of mine to bubble to the surface again, so I wrote it up and posted it to Usenet. I also reproduce it here. Please, this item is not the place for TGGD, slagging off Christianity, etc.


I have become increasing frustrated with the state of the Anglican
Communion (of which I am a member) recently. Particularly, the way in
which debate over homosexuality and the ordination of women has been
conducted strikes me as falling far below the standards of conduct to
which we, as Christians, are called.

There are members of my local church who disagree with me on many
issues - the nature of the eucharist, ordination of women,
homosexuality, soteriology, interpreting scripture, and so on. Despite
this, we are happy to share a church with each other, discuss these
issues, and sometimes agree to differ. Within the CofE, I'm sure I
also disagree with people on liturgical styles, purgatory, judgement,
the best approach to evangelism, as well as the above issues. This
isn't a problem to me - I consider that we as Christians are called to
unity; we confess a common creed, and draw our theology from
scripture, reason, experience and the deep pool that is the Anglican
tradition. I even sometimes disagree with the preachers at my
church. This gives me thinks to think about and discuss, not reason to
leave the church.

The ecumenical movement has taught us a lot about the value of
Christian unity. St. Augustine taught that schism was sinful,
considering particularly the parable of the wheat and the tares[1] -
God will separate the wheat from the tares when the time is right,
and humans should not attempt to do so in God's place. The Church is
like a hospital where sinful souls may come to find healing, not a
club for the righteous.

People differ on whether homosexuality is a sin or not. Whilst one
side may be a majority over the other, both command significant
support amongst lay people, clergy and theologians. Saying that one
viewpoint is "simple bigotry" or "intellectual hoop-jumping around
the meaning of scripture" is just insult-trading. Similarly claming
that one's own viewpoint is "the plain meaning of scripture" or
"properly applying the commandment to love neighbour" is to
over-simplify and to fail to respect the opposing view. Christians
can reach either position after considerable prayer reflection, study
of scripture, and so on, and both sides really should appreciate
that. Hearing that one primate is holding a celebratory dinner as
ECUSA and the Anglican Church of Canada are told to withdraw from the
Anglican Consultative Council until 2008[2] is deeply
disappointing. Is this really an example of how Christians should
conduct themselves?

Similarly, given that in some parts of the world, people face death
simply for being homosexual[3], I was dismayed to find an Anglican
archbishop writing in the Church Times to say that homosexuals are an
abomination. Should we not be speaking out against injustice, against
the persecution of minorities? Should we not be welcoming the outcasts
into our churches with open arms? If we believe that homosexuality is
sinful, then a careful, considerate pastoral approach can be adopted
where homosexuals are made to feel fully welcome into the body of
Christ, and helped to discern what God wants for them.

Finally, I should ask what message we as a Church are presenting to
the world. The headlines are full of "Church to split over gays", not
"Church reaches out to the needy". Now, I know that's partly a matter
of editorial bias, but I think it's still a valid reflection of the
issues that outsiders must think are important to church
people.

"We believe in one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church". Isn't it
about time we all, as Christians, thought long and hard about how that
applies to us?

[1] Matthew 13:24-30
[2] source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4296373.stm
[3] for example: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3653140.stm