Editor’s Note: This essay also appears in The Line Issue 11.7 (July 2024); subscribe to The Line here.
When John Keble delivered his definitive sermon, “National Apostasy,” almost two centuries ago, it was a prophetic call to lead the Church of England back to the path of orthodoxy from its deviations into rationalism and apathy. The sermon marks the start of the Oxford Movement, and resulted in a Church of England forever changed, even if not all heeded his prophecy.
The election of a new Archbishop for the Anglican Church in North America can focus us in a similar way. It is a time to define, as Keble did, what the direction of the Church is to be, and to hear prophetic voices calling us to orthodoxy. Speculation as to what the election of the successful candidate implies for the Church’s future direction is not the point.
Aspects of our episcopal election process resemble American civic elections and the hoopla surrounding them more than it resembles the way bishops and archbishops were chosen in the early centuries of the Church. When Americans choose leaders, they often are drawn to envision a John Wayne type, a flawless giant charging over the hill to single-handedly fight and defeat the enemy against enormous odds.
But John Wayne types rarely make good leaders, especially for the long haul. A leader who is determined to do it all on his own energy and greatness will turn out to be quite flawed indeed. Effective leadership needs abilities to listen, to consult, to delegate, to work well with others. It requires a clear vision of the direction to take. In real life, leaders can only lead where followers will follow. It means that the direction of the ACNA and indeed, modern Anglicanism in general, cannot be sculpted from sheer grit by ecclesiastical superstars. Like the Oxford Movement of old, the destiny of our Church will be forged one step at a time by saints resembling John Keble much more than John Wayne, in small and large parishes and dioceses, by dedicated and sometimes despairing faithful, who share a vision, and indeed a stubbornness, that keeps them going on the orthodox road, away from the apostacy which surrounds them.
I write this on 14 June, before a new Archbishop has been chosen, nor have
I indulged in any speculation on who that person will be. Thus, none of my comments relate to the individual who will be known to you by the time you read this. But my fearless prophecy is that the individual chosen will be flawed, and immensely challenged in facing his incumbency. No wonder when Pope Francis was selected as Pope, his first public words were, “I am a sinner.” If the new Archbishop has any self-insight, he will have the same humble reaction, as did Isaiah (chapter 6) in the presence of the almighty God. Just as some have expectations that the British Government of the day will appoint an Archbishop of Canterbury who can resolve the seismic divisions in what was the Anglican Communion, some may have expectations that the new Archbishop can, John Wayne-style, resolve the difficult problems within ACNA. Trust me, I am a bishop: he cannot.
That leaves the only hope as being you and I, a shared vision of a future to
be determined by effective following more than heroic leading. It begins by realistically acknowledging some thorny foundational deviations, something church people generally prefer to avoid thinking about. ACNA has a wonderful mission statement, to bring the transforming love of Christ to North America. But the mission is stalled in several myopic dark corners, despite the acute spiritual hunger surrounding us.
The first dark corner is our society, descending into a polarized enmity, seething with anger, deeply distrustful of our leaders, governments, our fellow citizens and newcomers alike. A crucial part of the polarization is economic, as a few become immensely wealthy and great numbers sink into poverty, the demise of what was a vibrant middle class. At the same time, none of the proposed solutions can remotely gain a consensus, and indeed often enflame the divides. Spiritual resources, transforming Christian love, could be the solution. But the notion that America is, or ever was, a Christian nation (or “Judeo-Christian,” whatever is meant by that contradiction in terms) has been a myth. The identifiable Christian voices in our national forums are a babble of competing viewpoints, few brimming with transforming love, many full of condemnation, division, bias, idolatrous nationalism or just plain wacky. There is little evidence that Christians are much different from other Americans in sinking into the polarized enmity.
The second darkness is within our midst, not “out there” in society. It has to do with our orthodoxy. We define ourselves as “Biblically-faithful, creedal Christians,” guided by Scripture and Tradition. The Creed is confessed every Sunday, the Scriptures are read. Yet virtually every current definition of orthodoxy in the modern Anglican context is about sex and gender. The Nicene Creed and the 39 Articles are silent on these matters, as are historic creedal and confessional documents in general. But the recent declaring of impaired or broken communion, and the consequent division into separate church bodies has been generated by sexual and gender issues.
Such matters may be of importance. Certainly, there is a need for better and more thorough Christian theological scholarship on anthropology. Better and more thorough anthropological science in itself is much needed, to better understand the causes and patterns of sexual orientation, both physiological and psychological. The Christian theology of creation is an understudied and poorly understood subject, which if done with competence has much to contribute to the discussion of this science.
Nevertheless, it does not define orthodoxy. That remains the manifestation of God’s love through the Incarnation and Resurrection, which alone can save us, restoring creation, including humanity, to a right relationship with the Creator.
In contrast, Christian evangelism in America goes in a bewildering muddle of directions. The Roman Catholic bishops have chosen their prime theme to be a political and legislative crusade against abortion. Many Evangelicals have embraced a national Christian blend of political patriotism, America as a reworked version of the Old Testament Israel, chosen of God to rule the world. Mainstream Protestants focus on justice for disadvantaged groups. These are but a few of the variations to cite in listing the messages being given to spiritually hungry Americans. The latter have reacted to this confused cacophony by an increasing exodus from the pews, their spiritual hunger unfed.
As we enter a new phase of leadership in ACNA, it is a good time to pause and contemplate our future. The present course is the destiny to be one more fairly small American denomination among many, in a global Anglican context defined almost entirely by disputes over sexual and gender issues. In this case, the best the new Archbishop can hope for is to prevent the decline or disintegration of the present institution during his term, a leadership of survival mode.
But that is hardly what God has called us to do. As Archbishop Fisher reminded us many years ago, we are not here to be a pleasant little group of Anglicans. We are expected to present the fullness of Catholic Tradition, with its clear message of Resurrection and Incarnation as God’s solution for the mess humans have made of the world. Transforming North America with the love of Christ will begin when this is our unique message to our fellow Americans, all of them.