But perhaps even more urgent for the Church in England than addressing this issue is the need to amend the growing incompetence and theological incoherence on the ground. There are three crucial elements that stand out:
–Almost ubiquitous liturgical chaos, where many evangelicals and liberals alike have little sense of what worship is for.
–The increasing failure of many priests to perform their true priestly roles of pastoral care and mission outreach, in a predominantly “liberal” and managerialist ecclesial culture that encourages bureaucratisation and over-specialisation. This has often led to a staggering failure even to try to do the most obvious things – like publicising in the community an Easter egg hunt for children in the bishop’s palace grounds! To an unrecognised degree this kind of lapse explains why fewer and fewer people bother with church – though the underlying failure “even to try” has more to do with a post 1960s ethos that assumes decline and regards secularisation as basically a good thing, or even as providentially ordained since religion is supposedly a “private” and merely “personal” affair after all.
–Perhaps most decisive is the collapse of theological literacy among the clergy – again, this is partly a legacy of the 1960s and 70s (made all the worst by the illusion that this was a time of enlightening by sophisticated German Protestant influence), but it has now been compounded by the ever-easier admission of people to the priesthood with but minimal theological education, and often one in which doctrine is regarded almost as an optional extra.
What an extraordinary piece. So many ideas from the profoundly practical to highfalutin Anglo Catholic fantasy.
In my old parish, a friend on the track for ordination, had a class in which they modelled the Holy Trinity with pipe cleaners. I kid ye not…
As sympathetic as I am to the article, this part lost me.
Marion that was, surely, a perfect example of bathos. We read the grave, worrying words about failing pastoral care and mission and find that it leads to … failure to publicise an Easter egg hunt?
Too wide-ranging by far. And too optimistic, I am afraid. The elephant in the room is the established nature of the C of E (BTW he seems to think some other Anglican provinces are established. Shurely shome mishtake.) It is the fact that the Church has to be ‘all things to all men’, as part of its calling to be a national church, that makes for the difficulty in establishing coherence or boundaries.
Glad to see somebody asking about the fruitfulness of Fresh Expressions. I have asked several times on this site what the evidence is for its success and no one has been able to come up with anything.
You should look out his pungent little essay “Stale Expressions: The Management Shaped Church”.
#1, LOL! I understand! Modelling the trinity with pipe cleaners, are they? It is called active learning! Sigh….. something which I find difficult to incorporate without a lab. I do think I will have my students using pipe cleaners to understand mitosis and meiosis.
At first glance, it seems a very impressive article. It deserves time for careful consideration.
My only response at present is a trivial one: when the two congregations separated, the RCs into the chapter house, and the Anglicans into the nave – which group did the donkey go with? :o)
But that is not meant to trivialise the article, which does seem worthy of careful pondering.
I find it extraordinary but predictable that no mention is given the Ordinariate in this. Surely any serious conversation regarding relations between Rome and Canterbury cannot ignore the most significant development in this regard in recent years?
It might suit Anglicans to downplay its significance, to pour cold water over it and highlight its current small numbers. But it remains a papal initiative and it must be taken seriously, for it contains a blueprint for unity. If we can share a common statement on truth then unity becomes possible and Anglicanism can flourish within the Latin Rite. It is a generous offer and Rome is very unlikely to offer anything else…
Thank you driver for the reference. I see it is in his book ‘The Future of Love’ and I have reserved it at the library.
RPP: your point about the Ordinariate is well made. Do I remember that you were hinting that you yourself might shelter in its shade?
RPP, since Mr Millbank was referring to co-operation and fellowship between Anglicans and Roman Catholics, he may simply be classing members of the Ordinariate as Roman Catholics (which they are), and therefore not consider that any further distinction is required.
But I suppose to be sure, you would have to ask him!
RE: “it contains a blueprint for unity.”
An interesting definition of “unity” — “conversion to Rome.” Heh.
RE: ” . . . Anglicanism can flourish within the Latin Rite.”
Um, no it can’t — no more than “Methodism can flourish within the Latin Rite” or “Presbyterianism can flourish within the Latin Rite.”
“Anglicanism” doesn’t exist “within the Latin Rite” much less “flourish.”
Certainly Anglicanism can flourish within the Latin Rite… assuming by “Anglicanism” one means “a minor liturgical variation of the Roman mass” and nothing more.
[blockquote] “Yet for all Bede’s veneration of Celtic ways, he insisted (and the British inherited from him) on a fervent loyalty to Rome and Roman ways, so that up to the time of the Reformation English characteristics were inseparable from the English people’s interpretation of the Latin legacy, including Latin Christian art and architecture.” [/blockquote]
An evangelical Anglican wryly wonders what happened to the strong medieval English tradition of independent religious thought: – what happened, for instance, to Robert Grosseteste, Stephen Langton, Roger Bacon, William of Occam, John Wyclife, and the many thousands of Lollards persecuted for their religious dissent throughout the 14th and 15th centuries? They are a part of English history too.
But we each write from our own perspective, and Mr Millbank is anglo-catholic and clearly proud of it, and whatever our differences may be, I am very glad he is standing up for the faith once delivered. But, I query the wisdom of his presentation in another area:
[blockquote] “The Church of England needs some sort of equivalent of the Catholic cardinalate. This could be supplied – not by the superfluous creation of an equivalent super-elite – but rather by reinforcing the collective international authority of archbishops who are globally some thirty-eight in number. Currently they meet infrequently and in various locations round the world, but perhaps they need to assemble more often and usually in Canterbury, so that they can be given a more consistent role in shaping a new policy for the whole communion. This would at once enhance the “enforcing” role of Canterbury (without which no polity of any kind ever stands) and yet also increase the influence of Anglicans in other countries.” [/blockquote]
And
[blockquote] “The [foreign Primates] might also be given special links to particular dioceses or even specific parishes in England so that they would have a sense of another home in that country and a stake in English affairs.” [/blockquote]
Clearly Mr Millbank is appreciative of the general respect in which the Primates are held. He is correct that co-opting them would add prestige to any solution for the CofE or for the Communion. But I wonder if many of them might see the proposal, couched in this way, as a little condescending? A little too “England-centric” perhaps? The Global South primates seem to be very conscious these days that each of them is primarily answerable only to his own church, to the (often) millions of baptised believers under his care. Many of them don’t seem to feel particularly dependent on Canterbury for anything.
As Bishop Adetiloye (later first primate of Nigeria) commented:
[blockquote] “In 1978 I waited at the microphone, and I was the first black African bishop to address the [Lambeth] Conference. I told the assembled bishops that I was the first to speak, and it had taken until 1978 to be recognized, but in 1988, the assembly would listen to what the bishops of black Africa were saying. Further, by 1998, what African bishops had to say would chart the course of the communion.†[/blockquote]
I do think this has been a great article by John Millbank, but I suggest it would be a good idea to *ask* the foreign Primates what they think, before assigning them a role in any scheme… ;o)