Friday, 27 January 2023

A Letter to my Bishops

I have now let the House of Bishops’ proposals for ‘Prayers of Love and Faith’ and the legal advice sink in and reflected on them. This has refined but not fundamentally altered my initial response which was one of deep dismay.

Since Cranmer our patrimony includes a beautiful use of the English language and an ability to find words on which people of somewhat different persuasions can agree. This has perhaps on occasion degenerated into a studied ambiguity which made us settle on words which people of different convictions are able to use because they read them differently rather than because they have found a consensus. Now we are at risk of playing with words instead of seeking genuine accord.

I delight in the generous orthodoxy of our Reformed Catholicism but it grieves me that the Church of England also includes clergy who scoff at parts of the Scriptures, even declaring them toxic, or who might laud Paul and the writers of the Gospels as people who made magnificent attempts in their time while urging us to move on from their failures, as we discern a gospel beyond the Gospels.

My comfort has been that clergy who care little for the Thirty-nine Articles or the Book of Common Prayer are usurpers and that the Church of England does not truly belong to them. I feel that this comfort is in the process of being taken away from me.

The ‘Prayers of Love and Faith’ may have been carefully crafted not to fall foul of the Church’s doctrine in the eyes of canon lawyers but they were not presented with a sufficiently clear, transparent and honest explanation of how they apply the Church’s teaching to various pastoral situations. No theological rationale was offered for continuing to uphold Church teaching. The morality of extra-marital sex appears to have been moved to the adiaphora. Several bishops, while welcoming the new resources, expressed their desire for a change to our doctrine and ethics. Phrases like ‘at the present time’ in the accompanying document clearly suggest that far from drawing our various listening exercises to a conclusion the debates are set to continue. And given that pronouncements like the booklet published by Steve Croft show little awareness of the discussions and research of the last few decades, we must assume that the debates will continue without making progress. Unlike our Archbishop I find no joy in this kind of diversity.

Doctrinal differences of the kind that relate to our formularies should be a source of grief for us. We must continue to make every effort to re-establish sufficient common doctrinal ground rather than make ourselves believe that we can still walk together, as if these differences did not directly impact on how we exercise Christian discipleship and pastoral care and how we proclaim afresh the good news of Christ in our generation. We cannot walk together if we seek the deeper unity for which Christ prayed in different directions. In words from the Book of Common Prayer we must long for ‘the spirit of truth, unity and concord’ and therefore petition God to ‘grant that all they that do confess thy holy Name, may agree in the truth of thy holy Word, and live in unity and godly love.’

I want to put it to you that while there are these divisions among you, you can be certain that you are not led by the Holy Spirit. Compromise is not a dirty word. But true Christian unity is not found in the attempt to appease different factions while sidestepping proper theological reasoning. We are at grave risk of becoming an ecclesial community whose participation, as a body, in the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church is suspect. I urge you to reconsider the wisdom of the current proposals and to strive for greater clarity and integrity.

Yours in Christ,

Thomas

 


Thursday, 26 January 2023

"Prayers of Love and Faith"

This is my understanding of the story so far:

In what is presented as a significant move the Bishops of the Church of England will offer its clergy a variety of flexible ways to affirm and celebrate same-sex couples in church. The resource is intended as a loving and celebratory response to same-sex couples and will include prayers of dedication, thanksgiving and for God’s blessing.

The prayers will be entirely discretionary and have been formulated with legal advice to ensure that the formal teaching of the Church of England as set out in the canons and authorised liturgies – that Holy Matrimony is between one man and one woman for life – is not compromised.

In some (*) of our Church of England parish churches you will be able to have your same-sex (**) civil partnership or “marriage” (***) blessed (****). This offer is also open to couples in covenanted, non-registered friendships (*****).

(*) the prayers are offered in the knowledge that not all clergy will be able to use them in good conscience

(**) sexual relations between persons of the same sex cannot be condoned by the Church because the Scriptures declare extra-marital sex to be incompatible with being in God’s kingdom but clergy need not tell you that

(***) the marriage of two persons of the same sex is not capable of constituting a marriage for the purposes of ecclesiastical law, i.e., a civil marriage between members of the same sex is not a marriage in the eyes of the church

(****) your relationship cannot be blessed as such but we can ask God to bless you as a couple

(*****) these prayers are not intended for couples who are not of the same sex


There have been angry responses from those who consider the apology offered by the Bishops to LGBTQI+ people to be meaningless, while same-sex couples are not allowed to get married in Church.  

There have been angry responses also from those who believe that the resources to all intents and purposes change the Church's teaching on marriage and sexual morality.

Some are relieved that the Church has found a way to leave "holy matrimony" (marriage as understood by the Church) unchanged while affirming same-sex covenanted relationships, others are concerned that the "don't ask, don't tell" policy in relation to sexual intimacy outside marriage might make a return.

For some it is a time for celebrating our doctrinal diversity, for others it is a time of mourning our loss of integrity.

Sunday, 1 January 2023

Jesus Named and Circumcised

A sermon for the eight day of Christmas, 2023

After eight days had passed, it was time to circumcise the child; and he was called Jesus, the name given by the angel before he was conceived in the womb.

We are given an identity long before we shape and refashion it by our own decisions and habits.

We are born at a particular time and space which we did not choose, with a body we did not form.

We are born into families or households which we did not choose, into a particular culture that will shape us more than we will ever shape it.

Identity is something all of us are given.

This is true even in a culture like ours which puts so much emphasis on individual choice.

We may have greater freedom to choose a career and lifestyle than previous generations.

We even have a legal right to choose our gender – whatever it is that we mean by that.

But the fact is that in all the decisions we make, we are still at best sculptors of our identities,

sculptors who work with the material given to them.

What is given to us is like a massive granite block, already shaped by culture and circumstances before we put our chisel to it.

We can work with or against the grain of the material but not without it.

 

After eight days had passed, it was time to circumcise the child.

Why?

Because Jesus was born a Jew and Jewish males are circumcised on the eighth day, long before they have any idea of what it might mean to be a boy or a girl, to be Jewish or non-Jewish.

Being born a Jew means, as the apostle Paul put it, being born under the law.

As the boy grows up, there will be decisions to be made whether to live under the law,

whether to receive God’s law joyfully or to accept it grudgingly or to disregard it altogether,

but the man cannot undo the fact that as a boy he was born under the law.

…and he was called Jesus.

Long before we make a conscious decision about the name (and nowadays pronoun) to which we will answer, others will have called us by a name not chosen by us.

For Jesus the name encapsulated the mission entrusted to him: God-to-the-rescue, God-saves.

Baby Jesus was circumcised and was given the name Jesus without being asked what he thought about it – just like we were all given a name soon after we were born and were incorporated into a culture or subculture which we did not choose.

 

And yet it was all very different for the Son of God.

Before the first human children were born, God the Son had already  volunteered to come to the rescue of humanity.

Before the first human children were born, God the Son had already decided to be born to Mary and to be given the name of Jesus.

For many generations God the Son had shaped the culture into which He was going to be born.

Before Abraham was, I am, he once said.[1]

He was behind the call of Abraham out of Ur in Chaldea.

He determined and promised that in Abraham’s family all the earth should find blessing.

He met Moses in a fiery bush and called him to prefigure God’s great rescue operation.

He accompanied the Israelites on their journey out of Egypt through the wilderness to Mount Sinai.

While God’s promise is for all peoples and nations, God’s law was given to shape a particular nation.

Some of the commandments, e.g. about circumcision but also about what could and could not be eaten, were specifically given to separate between Jews as God’s covenant people, and non-Jews.

Jesus was born under the law, into a culture shaped by God’s law.

 

But he was born also into a culture shaped by alienation from God and disobedience to His will.

In fact, Paul wrote earlier in this letter to the Galatians that the law was added because of transgressions, namely to show us up as law-breakers and to put us under condemnation.

Because the law had been given to Israel, it was in Israel that sin was identified for what it is.

This does not mean that God’s people necessarily behaved worse than others.

But it was worse for bad things to have been committed by those who had God’s law.

What’s more Paul may be suggesting here that the Law, with the accumulation of sin, had itself become a malignant force, from which oppressed people needed rescuing.

But God’s law cannot undo God’s promise.

The law was a temporary measure until the offspring would come through whom the promise would be realised and who would form one people of God, consisting of both Jews and non-Jews.[2]

 

By being circumcised, Jesus received the mark of God’s covenant with Abraham, the seal of God’s promise. – He came into our world to bring the fulfilment of this promise for all nations.

By being circumcised, Jesus was identified with his people, Israel. – But he came into this world to break down the barrier between Jews and non-Jews.

This was done in accordance with the law so that now, when the fullness of time had come, the one born under the law would redeem those who were under the law.

This may sound a bit like someone being born in a collapsed building so that he could rescue those who were trapped in this building.

In what sense had the law become a trap for us from which we needed rescuing?

Probably in more than one way.

God is one and therefore God’s people should be one – from every tribe and language and nation.

God’s promise to Abraham implies as much but it also designates one family, one nation as the special carrier of God’s blessing.

The law given to Israel shaped Israel as a distinct nation. The trap was that the distinctiveness and separation fed an ethnic pride which drove a wedge between Jews and non-Jews.

The law also makes known God’s character and so reveals to us how to live as those who were created in the image of God, as those who bear God’s name.

But in pointing the way the law did not actually give the strength to live in God’s ways and even incited people to sin.

So we have all become trapped.

All of us who were created in the image of God but failed to live in God’s ways.

All of us who were meant to be children of God but lived as slaves to other forces.

But when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, in order to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as children.

God-to-the-rescue, God-saves.

Some people use New Year’s Eve as an opportunity to look back and take stock.

  • What have I achieved?
  • Where have I fallen short?

These can be good questions to ask but above them all stands this:

He was born to rescue those who were under the law.

The redeemed are no longer under the law of reward and punishment,

no longer under any law that measures worth in accomplishments,

no longer under the law that condemns those who fall short of it.

We can be relaxed and therefore address the question of our failure quite honestly.

This is one aspect of our rescue: we can admit to have fallen short

and we can do so without being condemned for it

because he was born to rescue those who were under the law.

 

Some people, as they enter a new year, make new Year’s resolutions

or choose a word of the year as a motto, e.g., ‘persist’.

This can also be a useful practice to help us sculpt our identity further.

But above our plans and schemes let the name of Christ stand: Jesus, God-to-the-rescue, God-saves.

Jesus has rescued us from the slavery to sin and death, from the bondage to the elements of this world, from being under the authority of the law

so that we might receive adoption as children.

This is the new identity he gives us: children of God.

By His Spirit we can now cry out to God, ‘Abba! Father!’

We do not read God’s law with the anxiety of those who will be punished if they do not obey

but as children who want to learn about their Father’s priorities and agendas.

He was born under the law so that we would no longer be captive under the law.

He shed his blood, for the first time at his circumcision, so that we would not need to pay for our sins with our own blood.

His name is Jesus, God-to-the-rescue, God-saves.



[1] John 8:58.

[2] Gal 3:19.