Struggles in the Anglican Communion

Editor’s note: The following post arises from small group reflections from The Rise of Global Christianity, 1910–2010, taught by Dr. Todd Johnson at Boston University in the Fall of 2010. Led by doctoral students, the small groups discussed lectures given by Christian scholars in various disciplines, including significant changes that have occurred in global Christianity over the past 100 years.

In our Global Christianity course on October 27th, we had the opportunity to hear from Reverend Ian Douglas, now the Bishop of the Diocese of Connecticut within the Episcopal Church USA. Reverend Douglas is also a former faculty member at the Episcopal Divinity School right across the river from us at Boston University. He brought his academic and ministerial experience to the discussion of global Anglicanism.

The 38 episcopate structured churches and several extra provincial churches that share a common history are loosely connected as the Anglican Communion, which together is the 3rd largest Christian group after Orthodox churches and Roman Catholics. In Reverend Douglas’ discussion of the last 100 years of Anglicanism to the present, a common thread of tension arose: the struggle to maintain the integral unity of the Communion within the diversity of independently administered episcopate churches—between the particular and the universal, the local and the global.

Our discussion centered on some of the issues that cause tension within the Anglican Communion. Some of most divisive concerns center on gender and sexuality: the ordination of women, and the inclusion of gay and lesbian into the church, including the ordination of openly gay and lesbian men and women. We quickly noted that churches within the Anglican Communion, even within episcopates, sometimes move in completely opposite directions on these important issues: for example the ordination of Reverend Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire enflamed controversy both in the Episcopal Church USA, as well as in churches across the globe, particularly in Nigeria, home to a sizable proportion of the world’s Anglicans.

One of the participants in our discussion had regularly attended an Episcopal church in New England. He shared that his church was extremely conservative on the issues of the ordination of women and did not condone gay and lesbian partnerships. However, this church belongs to a diocese that is open and inclusive. When Reverend Gene Robinson was ordained, some in that church left the Communion altogether. They left not because of what was happening locally but because there was no way to enforce uniformity on the issue globally. The church that remained made a compromised to with the diocese to maintain a different theological perspective on gender and inclusion.

We discussants asked ourselves if the structure of Anglican administration allows for pragmatism and patience with regard to theological differences. Brad noted that pragmatism or compromise may not be able to stop large schisms, since defections over the issue of women and gay and lesbians are disproportionately large in the ‘global south.’

Despite bitter disagreement on the full inclusion of persons in the church because of varying views on gender, we discussed how Anglicans have come together to work against racism and Apartheid in South Africa, for example. The Reverend Desmond Tutu has said he had the whole of the Anglican Communion behind him in his struggle. We wondered if in our lifetimes we would see Anglicans rally so unanimously against sexism, or homophobia. We left reflecting on how the tension of diversity and unity play out along the important questions of who can be fully included in the body of Christ, not only for the Anglican Communion, but also for our own churches.

Eva Pascal, discussion moderator

http://theredconnection.blogspot.com/

The shift of global Anglicanism

Editor’s note: The following post arises from small group reflections from The Rise of Global Christianity, 1910–2010, taught by Dr. Todd Johnson at Boston University in the Fall of 2010. Led by doctoral students, the small groups discussed lectures given by Christian scholars in various disciplines, including significant changes that have occurred in global Christianity over the past 100 years.

On the evening of October 27, Episcopalian bishop Ian Douglas lectured us on Anglicanism. Most of all, bishop Douglas preferred to use “Anglican Communion” rather than “Anglican Church” in referring to the Anglicanism. According to him, Anglican Communion is the family (or communion) of churches that has originated from the Church of England and is now made up of 38 regional or national churches known as provinces with 80 million members around the world. He particularly highlighted that Anglicanism is no more identified with the white, English-speaking West, but a multi-cultural, multi-racial, and multi-ethnic entity. As a result, he stressed, Anglicanism is struggling to find unity at the expense of the diversity and at the same time, the diversity at the expense of the unity.

Our discussion began by sharing impressions of the lecture. By and large, we shared that the way in which he presented Anglicanism was appealing in terms of their goal being reconciliation through the gospel. Not only that, but one of colleagues stated that the tangible description of the tension between contextualization and catholicity was very impressive. However, there was an inquiry on the origin of Anglicanism. One argued that Anglicanism seems closer to Catholics in terms of theology and structure because, he sees, the schism of Anglican Church from Catholicism in the 17th century seems to be centered on the political situation rather than theology. Anyhow, we agreed that the global presence of Anglicanism is point to the balance of unity and diversity within its theology and administrative structure, i.e. ecclesiology.

Turning to the globalization issue, we discussed about the demographic shift of Anglicanism between colonial eras to global Anglicanism today. In fact, Anglicanism began to spread in the light of colonialism by Britain in the 19th century and by the USA in the 20th century. But the typical Anglican today is different from that of colonial eras. It is female, black and non-English speaking. As one of our members pointed out, there seems to be a gap between realities of two moments. Then, what causes this shift and the global Anglicanism today? One argued that the hierarchical authority structure would contribute to preserving Anglicanism. That is, though Anglican Communions exist around world, they can maintain unity amid diversity because of their episcopacy. This view seems to come from one’s structural understanding of Anglicanism. Another participant argued that global presence of Anglicanism is possible through the backlash against colonial oppression. By the end of colonialism, many indigenous people seek to establish their churches with Anglican background. In addition to this efforts, the goal of reconciliation through the gospel effects on the forming of the indigenous faith. As a result, this participant sees, Anglicanism by the black, female, non-native English speaking was settled down. We can surmise in diverse way, but there were two things we converged: the missionary efforts since colonial era and the strategic transition from missionary sending to missionary partnership with younger churches under influence of post-colonialism.

Gun Cheol Kim, discussion moderator

Unity and diversity in Anglicanism

Editor’s note: The following post arises from small group reflections from The Rise of Global Christianity, 1910–2010, taught by Dr. Todd Johnson at Boston University in the Fall of 2010. Led by doctoral students, the small groups discussed lectures given by Christian scholars in various disciplines, including significant changes that have occurred in global Christianity over the past 100 years.

On October 27th, we had an opportunity to hear about Anglicanism and its globalization by Rev. Dr. Ian Douglas. After his lecture, our group shared general reflections on his lecture.

We first talked about the history of Anglicanism, particularly over its beginning. During the lecture, Dr. Douglas posits that the Henry VIII divorce issue was not the most important issue but several students expressed different views. For example, one student argued that divorce problem of the English king was indeed a turning point, although, the issue of contextualization, as Dr. Douglas mentioned, was also very important. Other students agreed that we cannot ignore the historical fact that English reformation had something to do with complicated issues including political, social, and religious motivations.

After that, we talked at length about the “unity within diversity slogan” of the Anglican Church. One student pointed out that the concept of unity within diversity must be a recent concept since Anglican Church pre-American colonialism was rather intolerant. For example, the very reason why the Puritans wanted to make a new society was something to do with the intolerance of Anglicanism. In addition, the works of George Whitefield and John Wesley, who were ordained ministers of Anglican Church, were also criticized within Anglicanism. The other student agreed with him and added that he believed that the Anglican Church exported a universal Anglicanism in its colonial endeavors. However, we all agreed that the current Anglican Communion model can serve as a good model for the 21st century global church. And all students said that they learned a lot from today’s lecture about the important concept of “diversity and unity.”

Hye Jin Lee, discussion moderator

What can be learned from global Anglicanism?

Editor’s note: The following post arises from small group reflections from The Rise of Global Christianity, 1910–2010, taught by Dr. Todd Johnson at Boston University in the Fall of 2010. Led by doctoral students, the small groups discussed lectures given by Christian scholars in various disciplines, including significant changes that have occurred in global Christianity over the past 100 years.

On October 27th, we had the pleasure of hearing a lecture on global Anglicanism from Rev. Dr. Ian Douglas, former EDS faculty member and current bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Connecticut. Starting from the beginning of Anglicanism, he outlined the primary struggle that has followed the Communion throughout its history into the present: the struggle between the particular and the universal, or the local and the global. What has resulted is a Communion that strives to achieve unity within diversity, often through means of social justice, as they aim to serve God throughout the world.

In our small group discussions, we discussed the indigenization of Anglicanism in the Korean context. One group member, a Korean Methodist who has visited an Anglican church in Korea, was surprised to see the level of indigenization there. The building is built in the Korean style, and within contains Korean ethnic depictions and ornaments. A question was raised, however, about what makes a church truly indigenous. Anglicans are largely united by their worship service (liturgy, prayer book, etc). This was confirmed by our Korean group member who noted that services at Trinity Church Boston (Episcopal) and the South Korean Anglican church were almost identical, save for the language difference. Is language alone what makes a church indigenous?

Our group also discussed what other Christian churches and traditions could possibly learn from the history of Anglicanism, especially in light of what they’ve faced throughout the 20th century. Why does it seem that Anglicanism has had more success in achieving unity within diversity? We seemed to agree that this might be because of the Anglican Communion’s leadership structure. There is a lack of central authority, yet it is one cohesive unit and for the large part acts as such (within the 38 churches). It is not as easy to leave the Anglican Communion as it is, for example, to start a new Baptist church if disagreements arise. The sense of community within the Anglican Communion is certainly a strength that other Christian traditions might benefit from investigating further.

Gina Bellofatto, discussion moderator

What it means to be Anglican

Editor’s note: The following post arises from small group reflections from The Rise of Global Christianity, 1910–2010, taught by Dr. Todd Johnson at Boston University in the Fall of 2010. Led by doctoral students, the small groups discussed lectures given by Christian scholars in various disciplines, including significant changes that have occurred in global Christianity over the past 100 years.

After Ian T. Douglas, bishop of the Connecticut diocese, spoke about the Anglican Communion, our group huddled to reflect and process on what we heard. Our conversation revolved around two foci: the historical presentation we were given about Anglicanism, and the present form of the Anglican Communion.

Students appreciated how Douglas described the current situation within the Anglican Communion. His optimism and conviction that differences can be generative (not merely destructive) resonated profoundly. One student, for instance, found it comforting to hear the current conflict in the Anglican Communion framed in these hopeful terms, because in her own denomination the internal differences are currently polarizing the church. Additionally, she added, “I liked how he described the current situation. It is not something new. These people [differences] have always been here, but now they have a voice.”

Another student chimed in, “I am really surprised that the Anglican Communion has pulled this off, that they have become an international body. They seem so firmly rooted in England!” He went on to share his bewilderment that a tradition that seems so bound to its liturgical form could appeal across so many cultures. “I can see how more expressive forms of Christianity cross cultural boundaries, but Anglicanism? That just really surprises me.”

These comments drew out a lengthy discussion about what it means to be an Anglican. The lecturer had stated that it is the liturgy, the worship, within the Anglican Communion that is universally recognizable. It is not a confession or a hierarchical structure that provides unity, but the liturgy. Not everyone was convinced. One student observed, “In Korea, the Anglican Church takes a very ‘high church’ approach, but in Japan it is a very ‘low church’ style of worship.” How, then, are these two churches united in their form of worship? One student asked, “If it is the liturgy that unites the Anglican Communion, does that mean that they are not united on doctrine?” In other words, he explained, is Anglicanism about orthopraxy rather than orthodoxy? To all of these problems, students offered tentative solutions, but it became clear that the one hour with Rev. Dr. Douglas had been insufficient. Many things remained unanswered.

The final turn in the conversation revolved around Douglas’ telling of the history of Anglicanism. He had emphasized, strongly, that Anglicanism was born out of the desire for the catholic faith to take on a contextual form. The universal church needed to be expressed in an English medium. When it spread to other parts of the world during the 18th and 19th centuries, therefore, and managed only to reproduce English style congregations, the Anglican Church was unfaithful to its own originating impulse. This was a very attractive way of telling the story, and perfectly set the stage for the current diversity within the Anglican Communion. However, there was suspicion among the students that such a story was more propaganda than history. Could it be, one wondered, that the church in fact emphasized unity over diversity not only through the 18th and 19th centuries, but from the beginning? Is it only now, when suddenly England and the United States are not comfortable with the theological positions of the rest of the Communion, that they so loudly trumpet diversity? Is this revisionist history to fit their agenda? It was a sharp series of questions on which to end. For answers to such questions, more reading and reflection will need to be done.

Daryl Ireland, discussion moderator