Mission Shaped Mixed Economy Freshly Expressed Church

Paul Fromont has posted a (mostly) Steve Taylor post about the Anglican church and its mission shapedness.

I think he is right!

Archbishop Jabez Bryce and the territory of Polynesia

Archbishop Jabez Bryce, Bishop of Polynesia and one of the three Archbishops of the Anglican Church of Aotearoa New Zealand and Polynesia, has died in Suva. As Anglican Taonga reports, at the time of his death Archbishop Jabez was the longest serving bishop in the Anglican Communion, having been consecrated in 1975.

Like his biblical namesake, Jabez of 1 Chronicles 4:1, Archbishop Jabez Bryce "enlarged the territory" of Polynesia. During his episcopacy Polynesia became one of the three tikanga of our church, established the College of Polynesia within St John's College Auckland, and increased its number of bishops, including one ordained to serve the needs of Polynesian Anglicans in Auckland. There is much more to be said about the many ways in which Archbishop Jabez served God as bishop, on both Anglican and ecumenical endeavours. I refer you again to the Taonga report.

May he rest in peace and rise in glory.

The Lord God Made Us All (Anglicans)

Yes, God made Anglicans who give promotional space to a former RC priest who no longer believes in God. (Christopher Johnson's barbed wit is as sharp as ever on this story).

And God made Anglicans who tell women to submit to their husbands. I will hazard a guess that story A above would not take place in the church of story B!

Then there are Anglicans who worry about the differences between tunicles, dalmatics, and chasubles. God made them too.

Then there is me. I think all three groups of Anglicans above would assure me that God made me also. But I would not give promotional space to a non-believer, I do not think I should tell wives to submit to their husbands, and I cannot dredge up an ounce of concern for a debate about robes ending in "-les" or "-ics".

I wonder what God makes of his creations?

I would be surprised if the door was shut

Much analysis of the C of E GS motion about ACNA is going on. A wedge in the door for ACNA? Nothing to be concerned about for TEC and ACoC? I think the latter misses a point: the final motion may have kicked ACNA's desire for communion with the C of E (the initial motion) for touch, but it did not stop the game being played on (which the Synod could have done with, e.g., 'let's move to the next business').

As TEC moves to (almost certainly) confirm the Glasspool election, and as it appears to be making a move against South Carolina's subsidiary authority to decide what happens to property within its own diocesan boundaries, the wider Communion, to say nothing of the C of E itself, will be pressed to come up with an adequate answer to this question: is the Communion inclusive of conservative Anglicans or not?

I take it that a refusal to condemn TEC by the likes of the C of E GS is a measure of a reluctance to exclude those trying to find ways to be inclusive of gay and lesbian Anglicans. But that unwillingness to be exclusive of progressive Anglicans is very likely to also be an unwillingness to be exclusive of conservative Anglicans.

Providing ACNA holds together, and wishes to be in communion with the Communion, I would be surprised if the C of E shut the door on thoses wishes anytime soon.

Where have all the Methodists gone?

Not long after I arrived in Christchurch in 1971 I saw notice of a new Red Shield (i.e. Salvation Army based) scout troop being established. I had been a Red Shield Cub in Dunedin, so I decided to join this particular scout troop. To get to our weekly meetings I had to bike past St David's Methodist Church, a kilometre or two up the road from our home.

Within three weeks of arriving in Christchurch nearly 30 years later I have learned that the nearest Methodist church to where I work in Merivale, Rugby Street Methodist has been sold, and two days ago, perusing the property pages of the Press, I spied that two other Methodist churches are for sale: St David's, and the Clarence Street Methodist church in Riccarton. In idle conversation someone has suggested that all Methodist churches in Christchurch are for sale: I presume that is not accurate, that some will survive this selling frenzy.

I take it for granted that when all is well in a church there are not multiple sales of church buildings. When all is well, there might be individual sales of buildings because a church here is bursting at the seams, or a church there is non-viable. But I would be surprised to have a commenter appear here and tell me all is numerically well with Methodism in Christchurch, or, for that matter, the rest of New Zealand.

One could leap to all sorts of conclusions about what has contributed to decline in NZ Methodism which would not spring to mind as one of our more conservative denominations. I think it not unreasonable to suppose that somehow they have lost their way on the matter of decisive missional engagement with society.

We Anglicans down under may or may not be finding our way on that matter. If we do not find it, I believe we will have multiple sales of our churches. I am hopeful that we will find it.

There are three Anglican churches in North America

Thanks to David Virtue, we can publish the C of E's General Synod resolution concerning ACNA for you:

“That this Synod aware of the distress caused by recent divisions within the Anglican churches of the United States of America, recognize and affirm the desire of those who have formed the Anglican church in North America (ACNA) to remain within the Anglican family; acknowledge that this aspiration, in respect both of relations with the Church of England and membership of the Anglican Communion, raises issues which the relevant authorities of each need to explore further; and invite the Archbishops to report further to the Synod in 2011.”

David also records "The final vote was 309 in favor, 69 against and 17 recorded abstentions." (The official text of the resolution is here).

So there you have it: more than 75% of the GS recognises that there is a third Anglican church in North America, that it is a serious candidate for consideration for a formal relationship with the C of E and for inclusion as a member of the Anglican Communion.

I suggest it is now up to ACNA do so some serious soul searching. If this resolution is to be taken further following the Archbishops reporting back to Synod in 2011, there would need to be an unequivocal commitment by ACNA to be in communion with the C of E (recall: there are ACNA voices which are negative about the leadership of Canterbury), and to apply for membership of the Communion (recall: there are ACNA voices which appear to call for their inclusion to involve TEC's exclusion. But there is nothing in the C of E's motion which implies the C of E would support TEC's exclusion).

Of course there is a bit of soul searching for TEC to do as well. Could it acknowledge, beyond the "distress" of the situation, that there are significant differences in North American Anglicanism which are better accommodated by three churches than by two?

Just before I am shouted down on that, might I ask why there are two Anglican dioceses in Europe?

I presume their existence is testimony to differences which exist between two forms of Anglicanism in Europe!!

PS There is a very interesting argument in support of recognition of ACNA here.

Oh well

Flicking through Thinking Anglicans, Preludium, and even Fulcrum, in respect of Communion matters, and in particular with the ACNA question coming before the C of E General Synod on Wednesday, it is not at all clear that much will emerge at this time which will build Communion. ACNA has many critics. But if the criticism is deserved, might there nevertheless be some grace shown to them by the "Communion" (i.e. by people called into being through forgiveness and mercy).

Oh, wait, I know from comments made to some things I have said that ACNA has not been particularly nice to Episcopalians, so why should anyone be nice to ACNA?

Yet Anglicanism was always about width, accommodation, tolerance, and latitude. But here's the thing - touched on recently by Archbishop Mouneer - Anglicanism is not very good at tolerating those it deems to be narrow, exclusive, intolerant, and puritanical. So one can find this kind of comment on an Anglican blog, "... fundamentalist evangelical. We hate them ...".

Is the key to a renewed Communion a new learning for Anglicans: how to tolerate the intolerant? Or is Anglicanism basically a club for "people like us" - the us, according to the West, being the liberal majority - so no new learning required, just persistent eradication of the ones not like us?

Despite all the justifications for excluding ACNA from a seat at the Anglican table, I am left wondering whether the wood is being missed for the trees. This is an opportunity for the Communion to show ACNA what a big, generous Anglican heart is all about.

It looks like the C of E will not be paving the way this week. TEC will not do so at this time.

Oh well.