By Robin G. Jordan
The forms we use in our worship gatherings—the Scripture
readings, the prayers and the other liturgical texts, and the hymns, the
canticles, the psalms, and the other worship songs, influence and shape our
beliefs and thinking subliminally as well as consciously. The same observation
is applicable to the ceremonies that we use in these gatherings. They form and
reinforce the doctrinal associations that we have with these ceremonies.
The collective impact of the forms and ceremonies we use in
our worship gatherings is far greater than the impact of a pastor’s preaching
from the pulpit and his teaching in the classroom. For these reasons Biblically-faithful
Anglicans from Archbishop Thomas Cranmer and the English Reformers on have
taken care as to what forms and ceremonies are used in services of public
worship. They have sought to incorporate into the liturgy only those forms and
ceremonies that teach and support what the Bible clearly teaches, recognizing
that the Bible has plenary authority in all matters of faith and practice.
While they have not always succeeded, they have endeavored to follow this
important principle as closely as possible.
Beginning in the seventeenth century with the 1637 Scottish
Prayer Book, there has been a discernible tendency in some quarters of the
Anglican Church to give more authority to antiquity and tradition than to the
Holy Scriptures in the compilation of their liturgies. The resulting liturgies
have increasingly departed from the teaching of the Bible and have undermined biblical
teaching in the Anglican Church.
In some cases this has occurred because those compiling a
revision of a Prayer Book have adopted forms and ceremonies from other Prayer
Books without carefully appraising the faithfulness of these forms and ceremonies
to biblical teaching. They have modeled their liturgies upon the liturgies of
Anglican jurisdictions that no longer fully accept the authority of the Bible
and the historic Anglican formularies. As a result one sees Anglican
jurisdictions that, while they subscribe to the biblical and Reformation
principles of historic Anglicanism and its formularies, using liturgies that
incorporates forms and ceremonies taken from unreformed Catholic liturgies. The
use of liturgies incorporating such forms and ceremonies damages and weakens
their adherence to these principles and may eventually lead to their departure
from the principles altogether.
The 1958 Lambeth Conference with its recommendations and the
ecumenical, liturgical, and convergence movements are the principal culprits in
encouraging the indiscriminate use of forms and ceremonies from other Prayer
Books and other liturgical traditions without sufficient attention to their
faithfulness to biblical teaching and their consistency with the Anglican Church’s
Reformation heritage.
In other cases the departure from biblical teaching is
premeditated, rising in a large part from a different understanding of the
teaching of the Bible from how Anglicans have historically understood its
teaching. Here the nineteenth century Catholic Revival and modernism have had
the greatest impact. The nineteenth century would see the introduction of Roman
Catholic doctrinal and worship innovations into the Anglican Church along with
the reintroduction of pre-Reformation Medieval Catholic beliefs, forms and
ceremonies. The twentieth century would see the adoption of liturgical
revisions tied to humanist concerns—non-gender specific language, feminine
imagery of God, and rites for the blessing of same sex unions. It would also see
the introduction of non-Christian practices into the worship life of the
Anglican Church—labyrinth walking, sand mandalas, readings from the Quran and
Buddhist and Hindu texts, and the like.
Recognizing the need for a clear standard of orthodoxy and
orthopraxy in the Anglican Communion, the first GAFCON conference and the
Jerusalem Declaration called for the restoration of the Bible and the historic
Anglican formularies to a central place in its faith and life. For generations
of Anglicans the Bible and the historic Anglican formularies had provided that
standard. The Global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans was created to fulfill
this purpose.
The restoration of the Bible and the historic Anglican
formularies to the heart of the Communion, however, requires more than
rhetoric. It entails encouraging and implementing liturgical revision that
fulfills this purpose. It means discarding a number of the liturgies adopted in
recent years and starting afresh. It also means taking an active interest in
the extra-provincial liturgical revision going on in the second decade of the
twenty-first century and particularly in the Anglican Church in North America
and in other member entities of the Global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans and drawing
attention to any departure from the biblical and Reformation principles of
historic Anglicanism and its formularies.
In the case of the Anglican Church in North America the
GAFCON Primates have been negligent in this regard. They have preferred to turn
a blind eye to the ACNA’s departure from these principles and its denial of
official standing to the same principles to the point that it casts serious
doubt upon their own commitment to the restoration of the Bible and historic
Anglican formularies to a central place in the Communion’s faith and life. The
glaring inconsistency between what they profess to believe and what they do in
practice is not lost on Anglicans faithful to the Bible and the Anglican
formularies. It has the earmarks of what only can be described as a betrayal of
the biblical and Reformation principles of historic Anglicanism and its
formularies.
The GAFCON Primates appear to be willing to accommodate the
Anglican Church in North America’s departure from these principles as long as
it sides with them on the issue of marriage and human sexuality—even to the
extent of recognizing the ACNA as an authentic expression of Anglicanism, which
is from the perspective of the same principles far from the case. They also
appear to be willing to oblige its denial of official standing to these
principles. If this is indeed true, then it completely destroys their
credibility as champions of historical Anglicanism and its formularies. It
reduces the first and second GAFCON conferences to mere posturing and the
Jerusalem Declaration to substanceless rhetoric.
The GAFCON Primates can correct this perception and redeem
themselves in the eyes of confessing Anglicans by actively defending and
advancing the biblical and Reformation principles of historic Anglicanism and
its formularies in the Anglican Church in North America and in other member
entities of the Global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans. This requires
abandoning their present hands-off policy and intervening in the affairs of
these entities where and when such intervention is warranted.
It includes scrutinizing the ACNA’s Fundamental
Declarations, Canons, Catechism and proposed Prayer Book for any departures
from these principles and openly and publicly drawing the attention of ACNA
leaders to these departures. No whitewash but an in-depth and thorough
critique. It also includes denouncing the ACNA’s denial of official standing to
these principles and tying their support of the ACNA to its adherence to the
same principles.
The GAFCON Primates need to put the ACNA on notice that if
it wishes to retain their recognition and the recognition of the Global
Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans, it needs to bring its doctrine and
practices into line with these principles. It is only right that, having
enjoyed the support of the GAFCON Primates and the Global Fellowship of
Confessing Anglicans, it should conform more closely to the teaching of the
Bible and the doctrine of the historic Anglican formularies.
Is that likely to happen in the foreseeable future? I have
my doubts. I do not believe that the GAFCON Primates are as strongly committed
to the biblical and Reformation principles of historic Anglicanism and its
formularies as they might be. Segments of the Global Fellowship of Confessing
Anglicans may be far more committed to these principles than the GAFCON
Primates. The GAFCON Primates, however, are the ones calling the shots. They
appear content to let the Anglican Church in North America to do what it
pleases so long as it maintains a traditional view of marriage and human
sexuality and supports them in their struggle against liberalism and modernism
in the Anglican Communion.
Over the long haul I am convinced this policy will backfire.
The unreformed Catholic leaders of the Anglican Church in North America have
similar aspirations to the liberal leaders of the Episcopal Church. They see
occupying a position of leadership in the global Anglican community as their
manifest destiny. They are not going to be willing to
play second fiddle to the GAFCON Primates for very long. They have
already signaled in a number of ways their intentions to play a major
leadership role in that community.
Where does this leave Anglicans who are a part of the
Anglican Church in North America and who subscribe to the biblical and
Reformation principles of historic Anglicanism and its formularies? It leaves
them to use an idiomatic American expression “
caught between a rock and a hard place,” or for those with a
classical education “
caught between Scylla and Charybdus.” Under the provisions of the ACNA Canons, they have no choice
but teach the doctrine of its unreformed Catholic Catechism and use the forms
and ceremonies of its unreformed Catholic Prayer Book. The unreformed Catholic
leaders of the ACNA dominate its College of Bishops, determine who may join
them in the College of Bishops, and decide what legislation may be submitted to
the Provincial Council. They set the agenda of the Provincial Assembly and
orchestrate its business sessions. Bit by bit they are creating a theological
climate in the ACNA inimical to these principles and to those who subscribe to
them.
Anglicans who are a part of the Anglican Church in North
America and who subscribe to the biblical and Reformation principles of
historic Anglicanism and its formularies can, like
Odysseus who chose to pass close to Scylla and lose some members of
his crew rather passing close to Charybdus and losing his ship, sacrifice a
number of these principles in order to maintain their precarious existence in
the Anglican Church in North America.
Odysseus,
however, eventually lost his ship and his entire crew.
Odysseus would return to his native Ithica and his beloved Penelope
after ten years of wandering. They may not be so fortunate. They may be
captives in a foreign land until death closes their eyes.
The time has come for those segments of the Global
Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans that are fully committed to the biblical and
Reformation principles of historic Anglicanism and its formularies to
demonstrate that they are more reliable allies than the GAFCON Primates. While
Odysseus lost his ship and his crew, he
eventually would return home with the help of others. Anglicans who are a part
of the Anglican Church in North America and who subscribe to the biblical and
Reformation principles of historic Anglicanism and its formularies need help
too. They need encouragement and support. They need a better option than
remaining a part of the ACNA, compromising their convictions, and losing their
theological identity.
If these segments of the Global Fellowship of Confessing
Anglicans withhold their help, when they in turn need allies, they may find
themselves friendless. If the GAFCON Primates are willing to sacrifice one
group of confessing Anglicans, what is to prevent them from sacrificing another
group and then another if it serves their purposes.
Anglicans who are faithful to the Bible and the historic
Anglican formularies need to band together, not just in North America but
around the world. They need to unite to preserve the biblical and Reformation
principles of historic Anglicanism and its formularies and to pass these
principles on to future generations. They need to heed the Word of God and put
not their trust in princes, in earthly rulers and prelates. They need to put
their trust in one Lord alone—the Lord Jesus Christ.
