By Robin G. Jordan
I ran across the phrase “heritage Anglican” in one of J. I.
Packer’s articles or books. Packer used this phrase and another one to describe
himself. Whether that description fits Packer today may be open to question.
But it did fit him at the time. If I remember correctly, it was one of his
earlier works.
In Reformed circles Packer lost credibility after he
endorsed Catholics and Evangelicals
Together in 1994. Reformed theologians like Michael Horton and R. C. Sproul have objected to
its claims of theological agreement between Catholics and Evangelicals. They
point to the fundamental division between Catholics and Evangelicals over the
doctrine of sola fide, a doctrine
which is distinctive of evangelical theology. The Roman Catholic Church
condemned this doctrine at the Council of Trent and has never withdrawn its
condemnation of the doctrine.
In serving as general editor of To Be a Christian: An Anglican Catechism and writing its
introduction, Packer has lent the weight of his name to a document that teaches
a blend of Arminianism and unreformed Catholicism and which permits the
teaching of Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic doctrine. It is clearly at odds
with the views that he has expounded in earlier works like Knowing God (1973), Growing
in Christ (1977), Keep in Step with
the Spirit (1984) and Concise
Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs (1993) or even later works
such as Knowing Christianity (1995)
and Truth & Power: The Place of
Scripture in the Christian Life (1996).
Packer has also not publicly voiced any objections to the course that ACNA leaders have set for the denomination—away from the safe, well-marked channel of reformed Anglicanism onto the rocks and shoals of unreformed Catholicism. His contribution to To Be a Christian: An Anglican Catechism and his silence on the present direction of the ACNA have further damaged his credibility.
Packer has also not publicly voiced any objections to the course that ACNA leaders have set for the denomination—away from the safe, well-marked channel of reformed Anglicanism onto the rocks and shoals of unreformed Catholicism. His contribution to To Be a Christian: An Anglican Catechism and his silence on the present direction of the ACNA have further damaged his credibility.
What is dangerous about Packer’s silence is that it leads
some reformed Anglicans in the ACNA into mistakenly believing that they have
nothing to worry about. The reality is that they are in a very tight situation
and they have good cause for concern. Packer has become something of a Judas
goat. In stockyards, a Judas goat at
one time led sheep to slaughter, while its own life was spared.
Packer’s seeming acquiescence to the direction in which ACNA
leaders are taking the denomination should not discourage us from using the
phrase “heritage Anglican” to describe those who are reformed Anglican. It is
particularly apt in emphasizing that reformed Anglicans who are faithful to
their convictions are the bearers of the real patrimony of the Anglican Church—its
protestant, reformed, and evangelical character and its protestant and reformed
principles based on the Scriptures and set out in the classical Anglican
formularies.
I know from my contacts in the Anglican Church in North
America, the denomination has an undetermined number of heritage Anglicans.
They became a part of what would become the ACNA during the days of the Common
Cause Partnership or later with their network of churches.
I am not going to say before the unreformed Catholic
direction of the denomination became clear. The indications of the direction
that ACNA leaders were taking the denomination were evident even then to those
who paid attention to them.
At the time it may not have been clear to heritage Anglicans
how sweeping ACNA leaders’ policy of exclusion of reformed Anglicanism would
be. The ACNA bishops in their endorsement of the ACNA ordinal, catechism, and
trial services of Morning and Evening Prayer and Holy Communion have left no
doubt that this policy of exclusion extends to all areas of life and ministry
in the denomination.
Heritage Anglicans have not so far voiced any objections to
this policy of exclusion. Nor have they to my knowledge taken any steps to
organize themselves in the event that they and their churches are forced to
withdraw from the Anglican Church in North America. This suggests that they do
not fully appreciate the seriousness of their predicament.
They may be clinging to the hope that the ACNA bishops will
not rigorously enforce this policy of exclusion and they can maintain a
marginal existence in the denomination.
Nothing in the constitution of the Anglican Church in North
America guarantees heritage Anglicans the freedom to practice their protestant
and reformed principles and to defend and propagate them. It contains no
exemption for them from the use of a catechism and a liturgy or Prayer Book that
does not uphold these principles.
If the form of unreformed Catholicism evident in To Be A Christian: An Anglican Catechism and Texts for Common Prayer is formally
adopted as the official doctrine of the Anglican Church in North America, I do
not see how heritage Anglicans can maintain even a precarious existence in the
denomination.
I do not believe that heritage Anglican clergy are the Vicar
of Bray type of clergy shifting like a weathercock with the wind that blows the
strongest, placing ecclesiastical office before their convictions. Of course, I
may be wrong. If that is indeed the case, then the state of North American
Anglicanism is direr than I had thought.
The preponderance of evidence shows that the ACNA College of
Bishops does not want heritage Anglicans in the Anglican Church in North
America. The ACNA bishops have made no effort to show reformed Anglicans that
they are welcome in the ACNA and that they have a place at the table. Rather
the ACNA bishops have gone out of their way to show heritage Anglicans the
door.
Having shown heritage Anglicans the door, the next step that
the ACNA College of Bishops can be expected to take is to put a boot to their backsides and push them through it.
No comments:
Post a Comment