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.

Hierarchy and the Dance of Life

Some people are destined for misery, it can be no other way. Their problem is not understanding their place in the dance of life. For a start they do not know, or choose not to know, that there is a natural hierarchy in the created order simply because there is a Creator, and all else by very nature is creation. In the dance of life He leads and all the rest of us are feminine in contrast to his overwhelming masculinity. This is very difficult both for men and “liberated” women. It is not easy even for women who profess that their husbands are the head of the house and say in the same breath, “But, I’m the neck that turns the head.” Unlike their unfortunate husbands God cannot be manipulated no matter how lovingly.

Hierarchy is the principle of organization for creation and for every human society, even the Church. Remember that Christ Jesus is the Head and we are his body. That is reflected in the four orders of ministry; bishops, priests, deacons and laity. The bishop who said that he was the servant of the servants of the servants of God spoke only a partial truth, and we all know that a partial truth is a heresy. This particular heresy is endemic in the American Church where those who proclaim it most loudly discover that they have lost their authority (how odd?) and end up having to go to the secular courts to sue their brothers over property. Here the problem is the disconnected hierarchy of the American Church that refuses to acknowledge any authority greater than itself. Where is no hierarchy there is no dance of life.

Surrender to the reality of hierarchy is surrender to an hierarchical order that is by nature an authority structure. That should be too obvious to bear mention, but it’s not. The only other alternative is chaos. Dare I mention an unpardonable word? Obey! Dare I interject that word into our understanding of the hierarchical order of bishops, priests, deacons and laity? Humility is understanding and accepting your place in God’s created order. The kingdom of God is not a democracy, and where it attempts to be a democracy it fails to be a kingdom. In a kingdom one reverently obeys the King. One also obeys his delegated officers and ministers. In American democratic fantasy people fancy that they decide things by a popular vote. That is idealized in the Town Meeting system that has the unique characteristic of not working very well, which is why we elect temporary rulers to argue and vote among themselves while the rest of us are just expected to obey. Now my remarks about hierarchy may not seem very American or democratic, but that is because my allegiance is to a kingdom with another King.

Not all are comfortable with the idea of kingdom because the notions of hierarchy and obedience cut cross grain across self-centered human nature and leave them feeling that their freedom of choice is impaired, that their rights are being trampled on. St. Paul points out an uncomfortable reality. We are slaves of sin or we are slaves of righteousness. There is no middle ground. We will end up obeying one or the other. The only alternative to God’s hierarchy, its obedience, order and joy; is chaos, desolation and misery. The reason why some will live in misery is that they do not know that the truth will set them free, and that freedom is of necessity freedom from the tyranny of self, and sin, and freedom from isolation from the dance of life.

Apostolic Succession Is Not A Magical Act

For me one of the best approaches to the nature of the Church comes with this dynamic image from Henry Suso: This is drawn from the account of a vision that a follower of Suso shared with him.

God once revealed this to a chosen friend of God. Her name was Anna, and she was his spiritual daughter. Once in her devotions, she went into an ecstasy, and she saw the Servant saying Mass on a high mountain. She saw an immense host of persons living in him and attached to him. But all were not in the same position: the more each had of God in him, the more they lived in the Servant also; and the more closely they were united to him, the more God had turned to them. She saw how fervently he prayed for them to the eternal God, whom he held in his priestly hands; and she asked God to explain to her what this vision meant. Thereupon God answered her thus: “The vast number of these children who cling to him are all the people who are taught by him, who listen to him, confess to him, or are devoted to him in any other way with special affection. He drew them to me in such a way that I will bring their lives to a good end, and see that they are never to be separated from my joyous countenance. But whatever sufferings may befall him as a consequence of this, he shall be well rewarded by me.”[1]

The image is an uncomfortable one for modern Christians but well worth wrestling with. One of the weaknesses of the contemporary Church is that we have lost a mysterious and mystical appreciation for the nature of priesthood. Suso is being drawn up to heaven in a slow and graceful spiral and those who are attached to him ascend with him in a spiraling motions and mass that expands in circumference from top to bottom. The image is dynamic, in full motion, as the priest throughout his ministry in Christ and through the Spirit is drawn up into heaven. The action starts at the altar as the priest in the midst of his flock lifts high the cup of salvation and calls upon the Name of the Lord. It is a eucharistic action. “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a koinonia in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a koinonia in the Body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one bread (I Corinthians 10:16-17). Priest and people, one blood, one body, ascend together with Christ in the Spirit.

But this is not an isolated act; for the priests ascends thus in company with other faithful priests each attached to the Bishop at his altar: each Bishop historically and actually connected with all faithful Bishops throughout time, each now and throughout the centuries believing what has been believed always, everywhere and by all. This living divine strand of tradition reaches beyond the politically complicated “first among equals”’ at Canterbury. It predates the actual primacy of Rome which has always been debated in the truly catholic Church. This living strand of tradition reaches into the early apostolic Church as it reaches out to the many places in the ancient world. It is hard however to connect it with disconnected Protestantism. There is a grace of the Spirit clearly operative in the disconnect, but the disconnect is needlessly perilous.

Apostolic succession is often misunderstood as though it were a magical passing along of authority and position through the laying on of hands. Grace must be received to be effectual. There are clear biblical blocks that prevent grace from becoming effectual. Among those blocks are heresy in the doctrine of Christ, unholiness in life, and failure to love the brotherhood. Those blocks are clearly present in the hierarchy of The Episcopal Church.

Note that it is also possible for one to become apostate, or at least for inherent apostasy to become finally manifested for all to see. It is foolish to think that God would actually bless apostasy, or to think that an apostate could have a legitimate place in the apostolic succession. God speaks his frightening word, “You thought that I was like you.” That lets out a few popes but it also lets out a score of Episcopal and Anglican bishops. The indelibility of priesthood says its not the man but the sacrament and the faith of the people. In those cases the man, or woman is a void, a nothing, and God in his grace anoints others or skips a generation or two but that doesn’t mean that he abandons his faithful remnant in the Church. At times like these the Protestant disconnect is a rebuke to apostolic succession, a possible means of grace, even a saving grace, but still not God’s first choice.

[1] Henry Suso, The Life of the Servant: The Way of Suffering and of the Cross, Chapter XXII.

The English Way of Doing Things

There was an old bearded archbishop/
Who dreamt the church would not blowup/
He danced in the middle/
Spouting nonsensical babble/
While putting two lumps in his teacup.


I have heard it said that there is an English Way of doing things that needs to be understood if we are to understand the leadership of Rowan Williams. At least on the surface this is true; there is a quality of gentility, of courteousness, of subtlety and understatement that often characterizes this way of doing things. Yes, there is an English Way of doing things, but as a child of the commonwealth I ask you to remember the other side of the English way of doing things. Remember that this English Way of doing things brought us the Opium Wars in China, the American Revolution, the Boer Wars, the continuing conflict of Northern Ireland, and the disastrous partition of Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that troubles the Middle East like a volcano always on the edge of irrupting into massive violence. Finally, please remember that the English Way of doing things lost England its far flung empire, an empire where once upon a time the sun never set.

You see that English Way of doing things in microcosm in the fumbling gyrations of Rowan Williams. The English Way of doing things is characterized by Neville Chamberlain stepping off the plane in September of 1938 and proclaiming, “"My good friends this is the second time in our history that there has come back from Germany to Downing Street peace with honor. I believe it is peace in our time.” You know the result. It took the strong leadership and powerful voice of Winston Churchill to pull England through coming inevitable war. Obviously Churchill demonstrates a different way of doing things.

Remember that the English Way of doing things is not always courteous. In a scheme intended to confiscate the lands of the Irish nobility, the English government under James I in 1609 created state-sponsored settlements and gave the lands of the Irish nobles to encourage impoverished Presbyterian Scots to settle in Ireland. That has given birth to centuries of violence and death. There was in this no more courtesy, gentility, or subtlety than the English exercised under George III at the time of the American Revolution. Throughout English expansionism we see a velvet riding glove wielding a riding crop on an unwilling nag. The image is contradictory; surface gentility all too frequently cloaks a frequently arrogant and violent agenda. Beneath the courtesy one has to ask, what really is going on?

Not all the English do things in this stereotypical way. For every Neville Chamberlain, England is capable of raising up a Winston Churchill. Like the all the rest of us the English can provide either waffling ineffective leaders, or stalwart heroes. We have had our own General George McClellan, but we have also had a Robert E. Lee and a Ulysses S. Grant. At this point in history the English Church needs a Churchill, not a Neville Chamberlain, and the whole Anglican Communion suffers from the English way of understating things with such incomprehensible gentility. The problem in part is obfuscation. It is hard, perhaps impossible, to trust leadership that will not express its true intent with frankness and clarity when you have so many historical examples of the negative exercise of power in English history. Leadership to be effective requires integrity, courage and clarity.

Roots: A Prayer

My Heavenly Father: Over the years I have often said, “I am an Anglican first, and an Episcopalian second.” That declaration and awareness has comforted me in the past, but what if the Anglican Communion itself is torn asunder? I am saddened, but not shaken by the prospect, because the fact is that my roots are sunk even deeper than the few centuries of our specific Anglican history.

I am on the Canterbury Trail to the defaced shrine of the Holy Martyr Thomas á Becket. Well he understood the problems of royal privilege and its potential for contaminating the Church in England. As an old colonial boy I find it frustrating that the royals and parliament have so much say in the life of the Church, but you know I love the pomp and ceremony, the skirl of pipes and the rumble of drums.

My roots reach back through the long history of the English Church, through Milton, and through Blake who prayed, “And did the Countenance Divine Shine forth upon our clouded hills? And was Jerusalem builded here Among these dark Satanic Mills?” Through John Jewel and “ the Coming Down of the Holy Ghost and the Manifold Gifts Thereof,” through Cranmer and the Book of Common Prayer, through Julian of Norwich and Margery Kempe, through Walter Hilton and Richard Rolle, through blesséd Anselm who teaches me that the strength of my salvation is the strength of Christ.

My roots reach further back through Augustine of Canterbury, through Saint Benedict and the ancient Monks of Nursia, through Antony of the Desert and the wild-eyed desert hermits. My roots reach back through Canterbury, past Roman paving stones to ancient Celts and Britons by their smoky fires smouldering in the damp of an English spring.My roots reach even further back through wandering missionaries, Christian tradesmen, and Roman soldiers who bearing the cross on their hearts first tread upon the soil of the land of my forefathers.

My roots reach even further back through the long and dreadful glorious history of the martyrs of the early church, through the letters and missions of Paul and Peter, Jude and James and John and all the Gospellers now radiant in glory. “So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the Apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit” (Ephesians 2:19-20).

It is actually that last declaration that binds together the whole of this tumultuous history of the Church catholic and militant, that I have loved, and still love with every fibre of my being. My Father it is immersion in your Spirit, poured out upon the Church through the hands of Jesus our Head, that makes sense of the whole. It is one of your miracles that the Church in all its brokenness over the centuries still survives.

Time and time and time again you gather the broken shards together and craft again a golden vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the Master of the house, ready for every good work (2 Timothy 2:21). I find that instead of grieving or despairing, I am excited by the shaking of the foundations of our beloved Anglican Communion. When “the golden bowl is broken, or the pitcher is shattered at the well” (Ecclesiastes 12:6), nothing less than your holy hands are at work. My Lord, let me see! Show me the new golden vessel as it rises like the Phoenix from the ashes. Break us, mold us, make us, fill us again most glorious Lord and Father. We are yours, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.