The Church in Troubled Times

In this day when the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion are fractured by dissension I find the following excerpt from Origin helpful.

“I think that both the temple and the body of Jesus can be seen together as a type of the Church. For the Church is being built out of living stones; it is in process of becoming a spiritual dwelling for a holy priesthood, raised on the foundations of apostles and prophets, with Christ as its chief cornerstone. Hence it bears the name “temple.” On the other hand, it is written: You are the body of Christ, and individually members of it” (Origen’s Commentary on the Gospel of John).

This refers to the Church as it is, not to the Church as idealized. The key phrase is, “it is in process.” Karl Barth, a last century theologian remarked that one of God’s miracles is that the Church still survives. When looking at the Church and its troubles, take the long view, God does. He views the Church from an eternal perspective. There is nothing new under the sun, not even the dissension that marks our contemporary experience.

Origen goes on to comment on the Church of his day.
“Thus even if the harmonious alignment of the stones should seem to be destroyed and fragmented and if, as described in the twenty-second psalm, all the bones which go to make up Christ’s body should seem to be scattered by insidious attacks in persecutions or times of trouble, or by those who in days of persecution undermine the unity of the temple, nevertheless the temple will be rebuilt and the body will rise again on the third day, after the day of evil which threatens it and the day of consummation which follows” (Origen’s Commentary on the Gospel of John).
Origen links together Christ’s body and the Body of Christ which is the Church.

Accordingly the Psalmist says prophetically of the Christ and his Body,
“I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is like wax; it is melted within my breast; my strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to my jaws; you lay me in the dust of death. For dogs encompass me; a company of evildoers encircles me; they have pierced my hands and feet- I can count all my bones- they stare and gloat over me; they divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots” (Psalm 22:14-18).

The Church is indeed scattered by insidious attacks in persecutions, times of trouble, and by those who in our days undermine the unity of the temple which is the Body of Christ. Make no mistake; the unity of the Body of Christ is founded upon a common understanding of the teaching of the Church. To quote St. Vincent of Lerins (AD 434), “we take the greatest care to hold that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all.” In our day that finds clear expression in the Anglican Covenant. To undermine the unity of the Body of Christ by claiming some “prophetic” superiority to the Body as a whole is perilous. The Lord testifies, “They speak visions of their own minds, not from the mouth of the LORD” (Jeremiah 23:16).

Rather than follow the dubious spirit of theological innovation, follow the recommendation of the Lord Himself! “Thus says the LORD: "Stand by the roads, and look, and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is; and walk in it, and find rest for your souls. But they said, 'We will not walk in it’ (Jeremiah 6:16). The long history of the Church has many examples of those who want to drink from a different well. There is nothing new under the sun!

This has tremendous implications not only for the Anglican Communion and The Episcopal Church, but for us also as individual believers. It is of vital importance that our feet are firmly planted on both Holy Scripture and the Teaching of the Church as it comes down to us through the centuries. One way of preserving this is by embracing the characteristic three-fold Spiritual model provided by Anglican Spirituality: The Daily Prayer Offices; Recollection, the practice of the awareness of the Presence of God in meditation and short informal prayers: and in frequent Eucharist. This three-fold emphasis flows down to us through the Benedictine tradition. You and I have the unique privilege of anchoring our faith in this tradition by affiliating with the Order of St. Benedict. If you are interested, ask me how.

There is a day coming of restoration for the Church, not only the final day when Christ comes to claim his own, but the history of the Church testifies that there have always been seasons of spiritual renewal for the Church which is the body of Christ. Until that day we are called to make firm our faith; and to pray and labour for fresh springs of the Spirit in the life of the Church.

The Hierarchy of Love

There is a Hierarchy of Love that flows from the very nature of God, the Holy and Undivided Trinity and is implicit in the names, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. While the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, the Son in love delights to obey the Father, and the Holy Spirit in love and obedience delights to reveal the Father and the Son. In the co-inherence of the separate persons of the Trinity there is a tumult, a superabundance of love, that flows out into all creation in the perfect hierarchical ordering of the Co-Equal Trinity establishing a pattern of perfect joy and harmony for all created beings. Adam and Eve break their co-inherence with their Creator preferring themselves and their own will to God in an essential act of disobedience. They wish to be as God and are not satisfied with their hierarchical place as beloved Creation, beloved sons and daughters of God.

The very first thing that happens is that they lose the mutuality of co-inherence with each other and their revelation of the order of hierarchical love. Eve says, “Eat this” and then Adam, who has freedom of will eats and then blames Eve. That fall from co-inherence, mutual submission and family order has plagued humankind ever after and has all but indelibly marked the nature of each human family, of each husband and wife, of their relationships with their children, and has contaminated the relationship of Christ and His bride, the Church. The result is a broken Hierarchy of Love in which authoritarianism replaces love and the give and take that is necessary for the hierarchy of love to function in a normal manner. The experience of redemption begins a reversal of the broken Hierarchy of Love which deepens with our growth of love and obedience to the Lord who is the source of love.

In the Co-equal, Co-inherent and forever blessed Trinity most carefully we confess that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit each have equal value. “In this Trinity none is afore, or after another; none is greater, or less than another,” yet we recognize that the function of each member of the Trinity differs from another and that there is in this Co-Equal Trinity a Hierarchy of Love. In the ordering of Creation Adam and Eve, man and woman, are created in the image of God each reflecting the nature of God, each being equal, but in that reflection of the nature of God, each has their own role and function in the Hierarchy of Love.

Here I have the sensation of sailing to close to the edge and precipice of our theological flat earth and I feel the threat of trouble brewing; but far be it from me not to, in obedience, sail on. This Hierarchy of Love is precisely what St. Paul was hinting at when he indicated that the fullness of the Spirit comes with mutual submission one to another, the man to his woman and the woman to her man. The husband and the wife stand also in a hierarchical relationship of love to one another, and their children stand in that Hierarchy of Love in their own unique and necessary relationship with their parents. We quail at the words, “the man is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the Church.”

How dare Paul say that and how dare I repeat it? Husband, wife, and child are in the family co-equal and co-inherent, but the husband is the head; to him the wife stands in loving submission, and the child stands in humble obedience to them both, submission and obedience being two different states. The headship of the husband is as the Headship of Christ who gave his life for his bride the Church, even so the husband is to give his very life for his wife. In turn the wife is to acknowledge that headship and submits to the husband in turn giving her life for her husband, and the child who has equal value with them is to obey the husband and wife. Within that Hierarchy of Love, an echo of the divine, is a perfect harmony of joy.

Contemporary society lives, and for some time has lived in a fractured reversal of hierarchical love. Now there exists within families usurpation without atonement and an angry societal rebellion against the very idea of created hierarchical order. The reversal is complete. The child rules the parent, and the wife gives orders to the husband and is affronted when he does not submit. Stubbornly she will stand upon what she fancies are her rights. This personal liberation from the Hierarchy of Love works its way out in the relationship of the parents to the children. You think this isn’t so? Look into any American family and ask the question, “Will little Jamie go to Youth Group tonight?”, and you will hear the answer, “I don’t know. I’ll ask him if he wants to.” There is here no parental limits, no hint of the words, “the child will obey” the parents. Quite the opposite, the parents are hostage to the emotions of the child and will obey the moods of the child lest the child be offended at learning obedience and the implicit loss of autonomy. There is even a feeling that the will of the child should not be broken lest the child be damaged. The truth is that the surrender of the will is an essential element not only of spiritual life, but also of all interpersonal relationships. Individuals are free, not each one to be little independent gods, but free to live in the hierarchy of love with the mutual surrender necessary for society to function. The child in the American family is a spiritual cripple not discovering the joy of the words, “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.”

But remember that the relationship of the husband and wife, is a parable of the relationship of Christ and the Church. The Church itself is called to live within that same structure of hierarchical love. The Bishop, the Priests, the Deacons, and the Laity, the People of God are Co-equal and are called to a blesséd co-inherence bearing one another’s burdens and sharing one another’s joy. Gregory the Great spoke only a partial truth when he said that he was the Servant of the Servants of God. The popularised Anglican version is that the Bishop is the Servant of the Servants of the Servants of God, thus including Laity, Deacons, Priests and Bishop in an reversed pattern that in effect denies the Hierarchy of Love flowing from the very nature of God Himself.

The early Church did not view it so. Listen to what St. Ignatius says, “Wherefore it is fitting that you also should run together in accordance with the will of the bishop who by God's appointment rules over you. Which thing you indeed of yourselves do, being instructed by the Spirit. For your justly-renowned presbytery, being worthy of God, is fitted as exactly to the bishop as the strings are to the harp. Thus, being joined together in concord and harmonious love, of which Jesus Christ is the Captain and Guardian, do you, man by man, become but one choir; so that, agreeing together in concord, and obtaining a perfect unity with God, you may indeed be one in harmonious feeling with God the Father, and His beloved Son Jesus Christ our Lord” (Ignatius Letter to the Ephesians). In the early Church view of the relationship of Bishop, Priests, Deacons and Laity, we see a clear image of the order of hierarchical love. The early Church bishops did indeed give their lives for the Church, even as the Church obeyed them and also surrendered up their own lives in joyful obedience.

There is and ought to be a hierarchy of love in the Church for the Church is the family of God the Holy Trinity, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Son in love delights to obey the Father, and the Holy Spirit in love and obedience delights to reveal the Father and the Son. Within the Anglican Communion we have a working out of that same principle within the Four Instruments of Unity: The Archbishop of Canterbury, The Lambeth Conference, The Anglican Consultative Council, and the Primates’ Meeting. The challenge of the present time in the Anglican Communion is the restoration of the identity and function of these instruments in a Hierarchy of Love and trust capable of leading the Church.

When the Instruments of Unity together affirm that we need to renew and formalize an Anglican Covenant and the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church declares that the Archbishop of Canterbury has no authority to recommend her compliance with the results of that covenant we have a clear and angry denial of the call to live within the Hierarchy of Love. If your frame of reference is that self-actualization and the exercise of power are the guiding values of the Kingdom of God you have a denial and rebellion against that same Kingdom of God. In the Hierarchy of Love there is such a thing as godly authority; when that is broken we see a demonstration of the first rebellion of Adam and Eve. In the old, old story, what happens next is that when Adam and Eve confirm in action their decision to walk apart from God they are cast out from the Garden, their family is destroyed, and Cain kills Able.

Why Do Faithful Christians Stay in The Episcopal Church?

That is quite a different question than, “Why do people stay in the Episcopal Church?” The fundamental answer is in the call of God to be here in the first place. Let me state at the outset that no denominational group is pure. Human beings by virtue of the fall are corrupted and much of what we do is acceptable only under the grace and mercy of God. We faithful Christians are and will remain a blood washed band. Any student of history will tell you that there are heresies and problems in every church body; there always has been, there always will be.

When I felt the call of God to join the Episcopal Church in the late nineteen sixties all of the present heresies were already flowering with the Episcopal Church. There is nothing touted in TEC today that wasn’t already being taught and modeled by the seminary that I graduated from; Death of God Theology, Situation Ethics, and Saul Alinsky style social reform, all were part of the ongoing agenda. Where do you think our current crop of Episcopal Church leaders came from? Even then the roots of the Episcopal Church sank down through an immense heap of rubbish into the deep soil and bedrock of church history.

In the first Epistle of John two fundamental heresies are identified. One is a heresy in the doctrine of Christ; the other is the heresy in praxis, fundamentally the failure of love. TEC notably demonstrates the failure in doctrine, and many of those who have fled from TEC in fear demonstrate a failure of praxis. To read some of their published comments is enough to caution those within TEC, faithful Christians, or blatant apostates, that the critics are both incredibly arrogant and loveless.

Those who have fled, and I have know some of them personally, also have some doctrinal flaws that alarm me; notably an inadequate understanding of the nature of humankind, “there are none righteous, no not one, not even in the separatist groups. They also frequently betray a failure to understand the doctrine of the Church itself. What is amazing to me is to see catholic Christians aligned with protestant evangelicals and charismatics although there is no common ground in their view of the nature of the Church and authority.

Salvation and holiness are not assured by jumping ship and uniting with two-thirds world dioceses. I have enough personal experience in Latin America and Africa to know that there are no “pure” churches there either, although I will grant that they are in better doctrinal shape than TEC. Years ago a fundamentalist American college was slammed for their naïve claim that they were “twenty miles from any known form of sin.” Little did they know that like those fleeing from TEC, they carried their sin with them.

Faithful Christians, who have answered the call of God within TEC are grieved and with the psalmist they cry out, “Your servants love her very rubble, and are moved to pity even for her dust (Psalm 102:14 BCP). A reality that we face is that in many places faithful Christians and faithful parishes are being driven out of their dioceses, but that is different than fleeing out of a sense of outraged theoretical holiness. To do so is to betray the fact that you may never have discovered the depths of your own heart.

I’m saddened by the apostasy and blatant immorality of many within TEC but I do not see a viable biblical model for flight. “Come out from amongst them an be ye pure” refers principally to sharing in the life and sins of the children of the world. We too may ultimately be driven out of TEC and TEC itself may end up outside of the Anglican Communion and separate itself from the faithful dioceses, parishes, and Christians currently within TEC. To me being driven out is substantially different than fleeing because I think my doctrine and morality is better than what I see within the covenant community of the Church.

I prefer the model of Moses in Exodus 32:10 when God offered him a way out: “Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them, in order that I may make a great nations of you.” Moses declined the offer and instead prayed and worked for the transformation of the covenant people of God. These are the days of the Golden Calf, but too many of our “faithful” leaders, unlike Moses, have deserted in hope that God will make a great nation of them. Which of the prophets, which of the apostles fled from the sinful churches of New Testament times in order to become a great nation of theoretically pure doctrine and praxis? Tell me. Which one fled? Why should we?

The Anglican Covenant and the Special Convention

The Anglican Covenant and the Special Convention of the Diocese of Dallas

There is no reason why we cannot remain in the Episcopal Church and in the Anglican Communion at the same time by accepting the Anglican Communion Covenant. The Anglican Communion Covenant is not something new, but is simply a re-affirmation of our historical position as Episcopalians. We have over the years made a number of covenants and you may review some of them in the Historical Document section of the Book of Common Prayer on pages 863 to 878.

You yourselves have made a number of Covenants in the context of your Episcopal faith. Among these Covenants are Baptism, Confirmation, Marriage, and for some Ordination. Every time you say a Creed in church you are renewing your Covenant with the ancient and historical Church. The acceptance of The Book of Common Prayer is a Covenant setting forth the Liturgy of the Church. This covenant is on page 8 of The Book of Common Prayer and says, “This Convention having, in their present session, set forth A Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, do hereby establish the said Book: And they declare it to be the Liturgy of this Church: And require that it be received as such by all the members of the same: And this Book shall be in use from and after the First Day of October, in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety.” This ratification requires that you as a member of The Episcopal Church make a Covenant to accept The Book of Common Prayer as your standard for worship. That Covenant is part of both Baptism and Confirmation.

The making and renewing of Covenants is central to the very nature of the Episcopal Church and our American heritage. It is not at all unusual for us to belong to several organizations by accepting the Covenants of these Organization. For a number of years my wife and I have been members of both the Episcopal Church and at the same time Oblates of the Order of St. Benedict at St. Scholastica Monastery in Fort Smith, Arkansas. Now St. Scholastica Monastery happens to be Roman Catholic (quite a stretch for an old Scots Presbyterian boy). There is no conflict in making covenant with both the Episcopal Church and the Order of St. Benedict. We are also members of our Scot’s Clans, Clan Chattan and Clan MacNaughton, a two other Clans at the same time. You yourselves are no doubt members of the Episcopal Church and members of a number of other organizations. In most organizations there is an implicit Covenant to accept the rules for membership and pay the fees to maintain your Covenants, and most often you renew those Covenants annually.

Covenant making is part of life, and we do it all the time. To be an Episcopalian is to be a Covenant Maker. I strongly support renewing our “Anglican Covenant” with the Anglican Communion and at the same time remaining within the Episcopal Church.

The Rev’d. Canon Rob Smith +

Postscript: The Special Convention is over. We have not only voted to endorse but also to enter into the Anglican Covenant and the news is now out on the internet. I am saddened by how many of the conservative “departed” who make up the primary audience of “Virtue On Line,” have marginalized themselves by their attitudes and actions. You will note that I have characterized them as loveless. Do you doubt me? Read their responses to any view that does not agree with their strong and self-righteous agenda; then reflect on the truth, “by their fruits you shall know them. I was startled by the claim that the Diocese of Dallas is more liberal as result of the departure from our diocese of some of their number. That reveals that the writer of that remark has no understanding of the trend and history of this diocese over the last twenty years. From my own perspective what is remarkable is that the strong majority of this diocese has supported the Covenant without being radicalized.

A

The Anglican Covenant
and the Special Convention of the Diocese of Dallas


There is no reason why we cannot remain in the Episcopal Church and in the Anglican Communion at the same time by accepting the Anglican Communion Covenant. The Anglican Communion Covenant is not something new, but is simply a re-affirmation of our historical position as Episcopalians. We have over the years made a number of covenants and you may review some of them in the Historical Document section of the Book of Common Prayer on pages 863 to 878.

You yourselves have made a number of Covenants in the context of your Episcopal faith. Among these Covenants are Baptism, Confirmation, Marriage, and for some Ordination. Every time you say a Creed in church you are renewing your Covenant with the ancient and historical Church. The acceptance of The Book of Common Prayer is a Covenant setting forth the Liturgy of the Church. This covenant is on page 8 of The Book of Common Prayer and says, “This Convention having, in their present session, set forth A Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, do hereby establish the said Book: And they declare it to be the Liturgy of this Church: And require that it be received as such by all the members of the same: And this Book shall be in use from and after the First Day of October, in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety.” This ratification requires that you as a member of The Episcopal Church make a Covenant to accept The Book of Common Prayer as your standard for worship. That Covenant is part of both Baptism and Confirmation.

The making and renewing of Covenants is central to the very nature of the Episcopal Church and our American heritage. It is not at all unusual for us to belong to several organizations by accepting the Covenants of these Organization. For a number of years my wife and I have been members of both the Episcopal Church and at the same time Oblates of the Order of St. Benedict at St. Scholastica Monastery in Fort Smith, Arkansas. Now St. Scholastica Monastery happens to be Roman Catholic (quite a stretch for an old Scots Presbyterian boy). There is no conflict in making covenant with both the Episcopal Church and the Order of St. Benedict. We are also members of our Scot’s Clans, Clan Chattan and Clan MacNaughton, a two other Clans at the same time. You yourselves are no doubt members of the Episcopal Church and members of a number of other organizations. In most organizations there is an implicit Covenant to accept the rules for membership and pay the fees to maintain your Covenants, and most often you renew those Covenants annually.

Covenant making is part of life, and we do it all the time. To be an Episcopalian is to be a Covenant Maker. I strongly support renewing our “Anglican Covenant” with the Anglican Communion and at the same time remaining within the Episcopal Church.

The Rev’d. Canon Rob Smith +

Postscript: The Special Convention is over. We have not only voted to endorse but also to enter into the Anglican Covenant and the news is now out on the internet. I am saddened by how many of the conservative “departed” who make up the primary audience of “Virtue On Line,” have marginalized themselves by their attitudes and actions. You will note that I have characterized them as loveless. Do you doubt me? Read their responses to any view that does not agree with their strong and self-righteous agenda; then reflect on the truth, “by their fruits you shall know them. I was startled by the claim that the Diocese of Dallas is more liberal as result of the departure from our diocese of some of their number. That reveals that the writer of that remark has no understanding of the trend and history of this diocese over the last twenty years. From my own perspective what is remarkable is that the strong majority of this diocese has supported the Covenant without being radicalized.