Archives

COMMENTARY   By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org December 26, 2024   The Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Unity, Faith, and Order (IASCUFO) a permanent commission that advises the Anglican Communion on matters of doctrine, liturgy, canon law, and ecumenical relations, recently issued a communique following weeklong pro forma meetings in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, earlier in December.   For the record it should be stated that this is the liberal arm of Anglicanism and is no longer well received by the vast majority of Anglicans who are orthodox in faith and morals.   The key phrase in the communique reads: “As we wrestled with our divisions, we sensed that the Communion may be moving from a season of raw and antagonistic division to one of reckoning with what will likely be a long process of resolution. We may now be able to face our theological differences and associated fractures more productively, as we seek responsible and creative ways to remain together, albeit to varying degrees. This will involve recognition of the hurt that has been caused, as well as concerted attempts to find healing for past and present wounds, and to rebuild trust.”   They acknowledged the recent release of the Nairobi-Cairo Proposals, the result of two years of study and dialogue by the commission.   “We call upon all churches of the Communion to cultivate generosity in the spirit of The Nairobi-Cairo Proposals, read the communique. Noble sentiments indeed.”   No mention was made of the Jerusalem Declaration which states that GAFCON bishops are out of communion with Western liberal Anglicans in the communion who preach and practice another ‘gospel’ that is no gospel at all.   But clearly the IASCUFO leaders saw an opening with GSFA leaders towards resolving the Communion’s divisions and cited the Nairobi-Cairo Proposals as a way forward.   To put it more simply; GAFCON are the ultra-conservatives, the GSFA are the conservatives and the rest, mainly in the west are liberals or progressives who see and affirm change for change’s sake, mainly in the area of sexuality. The  GAFCON Jerusalem Declaration speaks directly to this and repudiates it.   The proposals, which were endorsed by the Communion’s Standing Committee, call for a new description of the Anglican Communion that strikes  the phrase “communion with the See of Canterbury”. These proposals also call to elevate a senior primate to serve along with the ABC with responsibility for chairing the other Instruments of Communion."   IASCUFO says it believes the proposals have “potential to help us find a way through our divisions and disagreements within the Communion.” It encourages all of the Communion’s churches to “cultivate generosity in the spirit of the Nairobi-Cairo Proposals.”   This defangs the See of Canterbury which the Church of England might not go along with; but with the CofE in such total chaos at the moment, without a functioning leader it might be a case of striking while the iron is hot.   The CofE is a failing institution, irrelevant to the life of most Brits and increasingly irrelevant to the vast, mostly orthodox, Anglican Communion – 80 percent of whom want nothing to do with the CofE.   IASCUFO added, “Despite our divisions, the Anglican Communion needs to find ways for the contribution of the GSFA to be more fully recognized and received within its wider life and mission. We resolved that IASCUFO should reach out to the leadership of the GSFA to explore the relevance of The Nairobi-Cairo Proposals to our most immediate challenges.”   Four of IASCUFO’s 18 members are from churches that have become full members of GSFA by adopting its covenantal structure (Alexandria, Chile, Congo, and South East Asia), including all three of the primates serving on the body. Two more members are from churches that have been associated with GSFA in recent years but have not yet taken up the process of becoming full members (Burundi, Kenya), according to a report in the TLC.   But as the Evangelical Fellowship in the Anglican Communion states, engagement with GAFCON will be essential if IASCUFO is fully to engage with the deep differences and divisions within the Anglican Communion.   The removal of ‘in communion with the See of Canterbury’ has been used to delegitimize the new orthodox Provinces, recognized by both the GSFA and GAFCON, (like the ACNA) and to imply that any breaking of communion with Canterbury is tantamount to leaving the Communion.   The recent decisions of the Church of England have meant that, irrespective of who the next Archbishop of Canterbury is, he or she will not be a person who guarantees that that will happen.   The elephant in the room is still Lambeth Resolution 1:10 which expressly forbids sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman and believes that abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage. It further stated that they cannot advise the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions nor ordaining those involved in same gender unions!   Archbishop Welby, (though almost out the door) is on record saying, “I am the focus of unity and therefore I cannot and will not ever sanction or discipline another Church within the Anglican Communion.”  His approach is to let the official teaching of the Anglican Communion as it is stated in Lambeth Resolution 1.10 to stand but allow contrary practice on the ground by not exercising any discipline (including within his own Church of England).  In this way, over time, the practice will overcome the teaching, and biblically faithful doctrine will become irrelevant.   At the end of the day the current meeting of the IASCUFO and GSFA might be all smoke and mirrors.   One thing is clear; both GAFCON and the GSFA have demanded that repentance and repudiation of homosexuality and its attendant lifestyle must take place before any rapprochement can take place.  And that, it seems, it still a long way off. END

By David W, Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org January 3, 2025   The Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell should step down, not simply because he failed safeguarding protocols in the church, but because he repudiates clear biblical teaching on human sexuality, that leaves the church, future generations and himself in spiritual jeopardy.   He has embraced the LLF Report allowing for the blessing of same sex unions even though the church still officially rejects homosexual marriage. It is a distinction with very little difference.    He has embraced a behavior that scripture does not sanction but openly repudiates in both the Old and New Testaments.   He believes that God has changed His mind in keeping with the times; that the ‘widening of God’s mercy’ now includes same sex relationships and that attempts to impose an old fundamentalist version of sexual ethics won’t play in today’s sexual climate. In effect culture determines truth not God’s unfailing word.   For people like Archbishop Cottrell, it is the hope and belief that such blessings would jump start the church with homosexual couples flooding the churches, boosting the church’s numbers and fortunes. It won’t happen of course. It never happened when The Episcopal Church embraced homosexuality and ordained Gene Robinson to the episcopacy. The church has been declining numerically since his consecration, year over year with merging parishes and dioceses.   But there is a darker side to all this when you relativize sex and it is this.   Cottrell has been credibly accused over his handling of the case of a priest accused of sexual misconduct. The BBC reported that the archbishop let a priest, David Tudor, remain in his post despite knowing that his parish barred him from being alone with children and the church had paid compensation to one of his accusers.     Tudor was eventually fired by the church and barred for life from the ministry in October after acknowledging he had sexual relationships with two teenage girls, aged 15 and 16, in the 1980s.   Bishop of Newcastle Helen-Ann Hartley, one of the few bishops to publicly criticize the way the church has handled abuse allegations, said she felt “incredulity” at the latest claims. She said Cottrell lacked the “credibility or moral authority” to be the church’s figurehead.   Of course, the church condemns this aberrant behavior and Cottrell must now violate his liberal views on sexuality by admitting the priest’s behavior is over the top, but he himself should remain in office.   Cottrell made every effort not to practice the church’s safeguarding standards and gave the priest a pass, not once but twice, suggesting that whatever he did he was exempt from church discipline.   The victims of the priest were naturally outraged and called out Cottrell and said he should resign.   Earlier in the month The Daily Mail reported that Cottrell had ignored a dozen abuse cases. With the Mail calling on him to resign. Cottrell refused. The BBC also revealed that Welby and a former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, were also involved in the Tudor case - Welby in 2018 and Lord Carey in 1993.   Cottrell’s laissez faire approach to sexuality, which no longer sees the Bible as the rightful source of understanding on sexuality must now include input from the culture, tradition, reason, science thus overriding the narrow strictures of scripture on sexuality practices.   To strike a blow against homophobia, fear mongering and hatred one must relent nay recant, and believe that God wants homosexuals to live freely with any talk of celibacy to be eschewed.   The fact that Jesus endorsed the binary male-female paradigm, speaks volumes. There was no need for exceptions. That Jesus hearkened back to Genesis, speaks volumes. Jesus did not need to touch on other sexualities, there was no need to. He had spoken declaratively and without apology.   If the very Son of God says the Father has not changed his mind in 4,000 years what arrogance it is of Cottrell to believe God has changed his mind.   Privately it has been reported that Cottrell told conservatives if they can’t get on board with the new sexuality, they should leave the Church of England for more compatible pastoral pastures. Cottrell denies he ever said this, but multiple voices say otherwise.   Cottrell’s position has riled up the evangelicals in the CofE forcing them to announce the formation of a new “parallel province” which, while sounding promising has little chance of success.   Even if the CEEC doesn’t prevail they will have raised enough noise to give heartburn to the House of Bishops. A future Archbishop of Canterbury is going to have to wrestle the situation to the ground. It will be painful to watch with no good ending. Embracing sexual sin comes at a huge price. In the case of the Church of England, the Mother Church, it will see its own demise.   Any way the Church turns it will not go well. A remnant church will remain but respected by no one, especially the Global South, who will view the Mother Church with withering scorn; a failed colonial enterprise.   The Church of England has sold its soul for a mess of pottage.   END