By Robin G. Jordan
The Anglican Church has four primary sources of authority—Christ himself who is the head of his Church, the Bible in which God has revealed his will for Christ’s Church, the historic Anglican formularies which derive their authority from the Bible, and the body of Christ, clergy and laity together, who derive their authority from Christ.
“What about bishops?” some readers may be thinking. “Aren’t they a primary source of authority in the Anglican Church?” Bishops are members of the body of Christ. They are not a separate class to themselves. The New Testament does not recognize the existence of such a class. They are not as Catholic tradition maintains the successors to the apostles.
The only form of apostolic succession that the historic Anglican formularies recognize is a succession of doctrine. They do not recognize even tacitly apostolic succession as an uninterrupted succession of ordinations stretching back to the apostles.
The Thirty-Nine Articles recognize three marks of the visible church of Christ—a congregation of believing Christians, the preaching of the pure Word of God, and the proper administration of the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper according to Christ’s command in those matters that are essential for their administration. The Articles make no mention of bishops except in Article XXXVI in which they recognize the validity of the consecration or ordination of clergy in accordance with the ordinal of Edward the Sixth. It is a real stretch to infer from Article XXXVI that Articles recognize bishops as a mark of the visible church. The Articles do not support such a conclusion. The Holy Scriptures do not prescribe any particular form of church polity and the Articles reflect their position.
What authority bishops exercise is that of a particular office and ministry in the body of Christ. They derive this authority from Christ through the body of Christ. The body of Christ does not derive its authority from Christ through them—a fanciful notion of the Catholic Church, which has no real basis in Scripture.
Bishops are divinely appointed in so far as any member of the body of Christ executing an office and ministry in that body is divinely appointed. They have no special appointment that sets them apart from other members of Christ’s body. The Catholic Church may teach such a fanciful notion but like so many of these notions, it is not supported by Scripture.
The historic Anglican formularies recognize three such offices and ministries—that of deacon, presbyter, and bishop, the antecedents of which existed in New Testament times. However, the office and ministry of elder-overseer did not become separated into the offices and ministries of presbyter and bishop until late in New Testament times. The functions of bishops today are quite different from the functions of bishops in New Testament times and represent an evolution of the office and ministry of bishop over the ensuing centuries.
The office and ministry of bishop has evolved from the senior minister of a community church to the senior minister of a cluster of churches in the same community to the senior minister of a cluster of churches not just in the same community but also in outlying communities. In today’s world a bishop may be a senior minister of a network of churches that are scattered across an entire region. This network may also include churches outside that region.
Bishops have lived in poverty as did the bishops of the Celtic Church in the first nine centuries of Christianity. They have owned vast tracts of land and armies of serfs and lived in palaces as did the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in the Middle Ages. They have walked on foot. They have ridden in carriages, escorted by running footmen. They have labored with their own hand like our Lord and the apostle Paul. They lived off the sweat of others.
Some bishops have taken to heart our Lord’s teaching that those among his disciples who would be great must be the servant of all. Others have lorded over their fellow Christians as if they were rulers of the Gentiles.
Some bishops have proven themselves men of erudition. Others have shown little interest in knowledge and learning.
If any lesson can be drawn from their lives, it is that bishops, like other men, have their strengths and weaknesses. They are no different from the rest of us.
Bishops are no guarantee that an Anglican province will remain faithful to the Bible and the historic Anglican formularies. Their role as guardians of the faith is overrated. Bishops are leading the Anglican Church of Canada and the Episcopal Church in the United States away from the biblical Christianity and historic Anglicanism. They are also leading the Anglican Church in North America away from the genuine Anglican Way.
As the Thirty-Nine Articles warn us, in our own nature we are predisposed to evil. This infection within our nature persists even within those who regenerate. The Articles further caution us that not all men are ruled by the Holy Spirit and the Word of God. We are naïve indeed if we suppose—charitable as it may be—that every man who professes himself a Christian is so ruled. The Articles also draw to our attention that “in the visible church the evil is always mingled with the good and sometimes evil people possess the highest rank.”
Evil takes a variety of forms. It may not always be evident to the eye. A minister may publicly lead an unblemished life yet entertain evil thoughts and desires in his heart.
The sexual abuse scandals that have swept the Catholic and Anglican Churches and which are now sweeping the Southern Baptist Convention attest to the truth of the Thirty-Nine Articles’ warnings. The Catholic Church has a problem not only with clergy sexually abusing children but also clergy sexually abusing nuns and fathering children out of wedlock.
Bishops can be drawn to harmful beliefs and practices as much as any other member of Christ’s body. They can succumb to their attractiveness and allow them to grow and flourish. Just as one gardener may encourage other gardeners to raise poisonous plants for their gorgeous blooms and give their fellow gardeners seeds and young plants, bishops can do the equivalent with harmful beliefs and practices.
Bishops may recognize the harmfulness of the beliefs and practices whose propagation they are encouraging but may persist in what they are doing out of defiance of those who have drawn attention to the harm that they are doing. Bishops are as human as everyone else: they may react defiantly to any form of criticism. They may allow their feelings to cloud their judgment.
Bishops who uphold the teaching of the Bible and the doctrine and principles embodied in the historic Anglican formularies do the Anglican Church a great service. Bishops who abandon the genuine Anglican Way and lead their flock down another path do their flock great harm.
No comments:
Post a Comment