That leads on to the second aspect of the Good Shepherd’s service that we shepherds must seek to grow into. The Good Shepherd does not abandon his flock when they are at risk; he shares their danger. It is only the hired man who will run away ”“ because he does not have the passionate attachment to the flock that the Good Shepherd has. In theological terms, we could say that the Good Shepherd can never abandon his own Body ”“ these are his own people, purchased with his blood, and his life and theirs are utterly bound up together. He does indeed understand them from the inside: truly human and truly divine, he knows ”“ as the letter to the Hebrews so wonderfully spells out ”“ all the temptations and troubles we know. And in his incarnate life, he exposes himself to the full weight of human sin, to violence and rejection, to the cost and the effect of all that is done wrong in the world. He is a Good Shepherd because he will not separate himself from those he serves. He takes the consequence of their sin and failure and he takes the risk of living alongside them.
So for us who have been called to Christian leadership, the message is clear. We cannot refuse to take risks alongside our people and to take risks for them ”“ to put ourselves and our safety or comfort at risk for the sake of the community’s life. Our authority comes not from being at a safe distance but from being there with those who need our ministry. And we may well think of all those in this continent who in the past and the present have so bravely stayed with their people, who have not sought safety or comfort but have stood alongside God’s precious children and risked so much so as to be able to go on speaking the word of life. In this country, as we have already been reminded this morning, we cannot fail to remember Janani Luwum; but in our own times, there have been many who have courageously continued in this tradition ”“ and here we think specially today with celebration and thanksgiving of our brothers in Sudan, in DRC and Zimbabwe whose authority as pastors in the church of God rests so deeply on their willingness to take risks alongside their flock and for them ”“ while witnesses, in St Peter’s words, witnesses to both suffering and glory.
One of the focal points of this Conference is the renewal of leadership in Africa. And all of us know that, here as elsewhere in the world, there can be no lasting justice without sacrificial and selfless political leadership….
I am unimpressed. It reads like a highly nuanced version of one of Mrs Schori’s incessant emissions.
Rowan seems obviously to be upbraiding the African primates for withdrawing to whatever extent from “dialogue” and his version of “indaba” and his other shell games and subversions of actual communion discipline. But he stands convicted by his own words for his dissembling advances of the GLBT agenda and turning a blind eye to the preaching of false doctrine and outright heresy in COE, TEC, ACC and elsewhere:
[blockquote]The Good Shepherd does not abandon his flock when they are at risk; he shares their danger. It is only the hired man who will run away – because he does not have the passionate attachment to the flock that the Good Shepherd has. In theological terms, we could say that the Good Shepherd can never abandon his own Body – these are his own people, purchased with his blood, and his life and theirs are utterly bound up together. He does indeed understand them from the inside: truly human and truly divine, he knows – as the letter to the Hebrews so wonderfully spells out – all the temptations and troubles we know. And in his incarnate life, he exposes himself to the full weight of human sin, to violence and rejection, to the cost and the effect of all that is done wrong in the world. He is a Good Shepherd because he will not separate himself from those he serves. He takes the consequence of their sin and failure and he takes the risk of living alongside them.[/blockquote]
Rowan has abandoned the orthodox of his worldwide and home province flock to their marginalization and sometimes outright expulsion by revisionists who deny, taken together, every foundational and essential point of Christian doctrine. A masked advocate of pagan priests lectures the faithful. We can read the warnings against such in the verses ommitted from the Episcopal Lectionary.
Precisely true, Milton. Alas.
This is rich “. . .he shares their danger” and “put ourselves and our safety or comfort at risk for the sake of the community’s life.” WHEN has Rowan Cantaur done any of this himself?
I’m getting the feeling, as a reread this sermon, that he’s talking down to the assembled bishops, condescending to ‘teach’ them something they don’t know. There’s a whiff of TEC’s ethnocentric subconscious racism floating from his writing….
I hesitated to comment when I first read it earlier.. But, what I heard was, the folks that stayed home, and minded their own flocks were the “good shepherds”… Apparently telling them to mind their own “business/flock”…. Sorry, hate to be so cynical, but that is where he went.
Grannie G
Ah – Doctor Williams I presume?
While I certainly pray that Abp. Rowan listens and learns from his colleagues in Africa — he has much to learn! — I really don’t think this sermon should be read in code. I believe he is preaching straightforwardly and from the heart his sense of common calling with his brethren here — and in fact, his words are well grounded in the Scriptures and in the model of Christ Jesus. Indeed, as with most of us, he is probably preaching to himself (that is, words he knows he must hear first, before anyone else) as much as to those who are listening. His references in the excerpt posted here to bishops in the Sudan, DRC, and Zimbabwe are indeed powerful references to real witnesses that all of us would do well to take to heart. The Good Shepherd is indeed a challenge to all of us who would be pastors.
I also think it is hard to read the sermon as coded gauntlet. It is not RDW’s style and it would be seriously foolish…this is not a home game and more than anyone else, he must realize this. We are facing into the hardest innings of this long struggle. Prayer for Christ’s will to be done.
#8 and #9 Drs Radner and Seitz
While your charitable view does you credit, that is not the way that it appears that the African press is reporting the Archbishop’s Sermon in this report from Agence France Press in Kenya’s Daily Nation linked here by Canon Harmon:
[blockquote]While he did not mention homosexuality, he said it was the duty of all bishops to be open minded on contentious issues.
“We must learn to listen to those we lead and serve to find out what their hopes and needs and confusions are. We must love them and attend to their humanity in all its diversity,” he said.
“We cannot assume we always know better and that we always have the right answer to any specific question.” [/blockquote]
No change at all, as expected, in the Archbishop’s ability to misjudge his audience, and come across as arrogant and patronising, and no sign of any willingness to change his style, though there are good points in the balance of his sermon. It is indeed RDW’s style and all the indications are that he intends to continue with it, however foolish he may be. There are no indications that he has taken on board that: “this is not a home game and more than anyone else, he must realize this”. The reason he has not taken this on board is his characteristic arrogance.
Though I do agree with you that “We are facing into the hardest innings of this long struggle. Prayer for Christ’s will to be done.”
Also worth noting that listening is solely to be applied to people that the Archbishop thinks should be listened to. There are no indications that the Archbishop has any intention of really listening to the African Bishops, since he has started off by lecturing them in a very patronising fashion on how they should act as bishops.
There is nothing he can learn from them, as his ears are closed, and when he talks of listening, what he means is his manipulative continuing Indaba process, whereby he is attempting to subvert those who follow the Bible, as he has done for the last several years.
If there is any impetus for a non-Canterbury led Communion, the Archbishop [if he would but realise it] is its driving force.
#11 If you are right, he is certainly daft. Who is the world would he be hoping to persuade in that crowd? We are far too far into this.
BTW, the idea that the Press hears it as you say is good news in that it keeps the pressure on. If he is indeed preaching to the assembled to tell them to change their views on the character of Christian marriage, as you intimate, then we are watching last innings play out.
That the Archbishop continues, as he did in Singapore to undermine the office which he holds, and my church with it, is just tragic.
#13 Prof Seitz
There is always hope in Christ, and through his faithful servants in Africa and indeed most of the Communion and also those such as you and Dr Radner in TEC. I thought the ACI’s latest piece a very positive contribution to the Communion.
“to put ourselves and our safety or comfort at risk for the sake of the community’s life” – unless, of course, it’s the ACC rules and regs, where clearly imperialistic Westerns must dominate, -eh?
Thanks very much, Pageant. And for your hard work in the CofE context.