Hooker's Hope

I am thankful we no longer settle our theological debates with a stake and torch. The atrocities perpetrated in the name of God, like burning at the stake, disembowelment and drownings to name only a few, have been replaced by less violent power plays. Recently it was reported that yet another Anglican congregation in Northern Ohio has lost a costly legal battle with its former Episcopal Diocese, and now has vacated its church facility built and paid for by the current congregation. No one in its membership has chosen to remain in The Episcopal Church. This congregation has been a leader in the Renewal Movement in the church for decades and none of its members were actively supportive of the liberal drift and moral revisionism of the mother church. Sadly the building now sits empty on Sunday mornings.

I suppose we can count our blessing that their clergy were merely defrock on charges of "abandonment" and not taken out, strapped to a stake and set ablaze. In some way we can thank Richard Hooker and the English reformers who surrounded him. They were the next generation of Anglican leaders after the dark years of the protestant transformation of the church in England to the Church of England. It was Hooker's work that laid the foundation for structuring the church in a way that separated the power of the state from the power of the church. We no longer fear that the church has the power to imprison or execute its antagonist. Our generation has no memory of such power, but we have a sense, by the millions of dollars spent on litigation in secular courts, that if given such power some in the church today would been tempted to use it. Regardless of ones theological assumptions or position, one must conclude that such hurtful and unjust actions are at their core a result of unregenerate hearts in the leadership of the visible church. How else could Christian people treat each other this way? This should not surprise us for Jesus did teach that their would tares among the wheat even in His church.

The sad legacy of Protestantism is that the institutional church splits and splinters much too quickly. I suppose for Hooker's generation, having seen ecclesiastical carnage of the previous generation, they strove to eliminate from church polity a Popish Majesterium which held absolute power and authority. They laid before the church a more dispersed model of leadership. His vision was that institution should be lead by a counsel of Bishops as a model of dispersed power, yet he resisted diluting the structure of church down to a congregational model of polity his Puritan contemporaries practiced where each church fellowship was an island unto itself. The middle way of Hooker and others of the Elizabethan Settlement was to hold the church together through a system of institutional checks and balances.

Thankfully our current unpleasantness in Anglicanism will not be settled in the meadows of Smithfield. We lament that our differences rooted in our understanding of the authority of Scripture have caused the fabric of the Anglican Communion to be torn asunder. But it is appropriate to ask in our day; where are the voices of reason and moderation? Where is the leaders who can take the higher ground by sending the dissenters out with a blessing and not a curse? Where are the leaders, who after years of trying to live in the middle way, must bless opposing churchmen to pursue their new course of discipleship without punishing them. Shame on the Church leadership who have found punishment by civil litigation to be the way forward rather than discernment and justice for all parties involved.

I suspect Richard Hooker postulated in his heart such a day conflict and schism would once again fall upon the church, but I wonder if he would have hoped for a more genteel and God honoring outcome.

Houston Conference

Winter Conference Reflection 2012

This year's conference was going to be different in light the events of the last few months and the resignation of most of our bishops from the House of Bishops in Rwanda. I had many questions and hoped to better understand what was happening. I had hoped to hear that attempts at reconciliation were being made for missteps with all parties. I also hoped to hear what the Council of Bishops felt was the process for moving forward. Most these expectations were met.

As always, the greatest value of my winter conference experience was not the wonderful worship, or the inspiring teachings (which were again quite good), but the relational time I had with other brothers and sisters who are laboring in the vineyard. I was saddened this year by the absence of some whom I fear are choosing to move in a different network of Anglican ministry. Time will tell if this is the case.

I came away from our time together having heard from the Chairman Chuck Murphy and other bishops an apology for the confusion caused and lack of communication as the events of the last few months have unfolded. I heard remorse over some of the actions done and words that were spoken. But I am aware that not all the mistakes were made on their end of the relationship. I also know that the realigning within the Mission is not simply an issue of Rwandan oversight for some, but there exists some unresolved disagreement and conflicting views about the Mission's direction that has gone on for several years and is now being manifest in a possible divergence.

I was particularly pleased that a first step in the process of reconciliation, mediated through the archbishop of Kenya , between Rwandan and AMIA leaders took place two weeks ago. It is not restoration or the end of the reconciliation process but it was the start. As an "armchair quarterback" I could readily say where I think all parties erred but now I am more interested in the process of seeing relationships restored. This will not be a short process. Trust has been broken and it is not readily repaired.

I trust the Bishop's Council. They have worked hard, sacrificed much and done so many things well, that it seems too impulsive to break relationship with them over this issue only, though admittedly my confidence in them has been challenged at bit. They are working and open to reconciliation. They are aware of the hurt and uncertainty they have created. The legal status of AMIA is sound under the structure of a Board of Directors. Clergy credentials are still under Rwanda and may have to be transferred at a later date. There is no need to make hasty affiliation changes while relational and institutional differences are being worked through. I see the Spirit working and hear reports of ongoing ministry taking place, the Gospel is still being proclaimed and new people are still being drawn to the mission.

As a dreamer/visionary personality, I am having to remind myself that there is no perfect church or ecclesiastical institution. As much as I hoped we could do our best in the forming of something new in AMIA, alas "my" ideal vision is only ideal to me. AMIA is not perfect. It looks like it is changing and will continue to change, but I trust those in authority over me that they are seeking the Lord and trying to do the best they can for Christ and His people.

I feel called to pray for the Bishops and for our Rwandan leaders and those who will not follow the Council of Bishops. I feel called to forgive our Bishops and Chairman for mistakes made and pray they will move forward under the Father's leading. I will do my part to reach out to those I know who are in the Mission but I did not see at the conference. I want to bless and continue to foster our common work even if they feel led to change organizational affiliation. I want to redouble my personal efforts to build working relationships with those orthodox Anglicans who are closest to me despite their Anglican pedigree.