Theo Hobson: The death of liberal Anglicanism

Is it still possible to be a liberal Anglican? Not in the old way. Liberal Anglicans have to follow Williams onto the high wire, to some extent. By staying within an institution that has taken an anti-liberal turn, they collude in his act. In other words, liberal Anglicans have been Rowanised. They buy his long-range hope for reform that the church as a whole can accept.

Why has this happened? Why hasn’t a tougher liberal Anglicanism emerged that says that the truth of liberalism must not be sacrificed to “unity”? If Christian unity is so important (it would say), then surely the break with Rome was a mistake ”“ surely Anglicans should repent of it right now. Isn’t this version of Christianity one that tries to incorporate liberal principles? Why is such liberal Christian rhetoric more or less absent among Anglican clergy?

The answer, as I see it, is that institutional religion is not very compatible with liberalism, at the end of the day. It is addicted to some degree of authoritarianism, legalism. The Church of England concealed this, for centuries ”“ thanks to its cultural establishment it was a fairly liberal Christian institution. But that era’s over. It now follows the logic of Roman Catholicism ”“ liberalism is a threat to unity.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * Culture-Watch, * International News & Commentary, Anglican Provinces, Archbishop of Canterbury, Church of England (CoE), England / UK, Lambeth 2008, Religion & Culture

7 comments on “Theo Hobson: The death of liberal Anglicanism

  1. Dilbertnomore says:

    And the death of liberal Anglicanism would be a problem …. why?

  2. Ad Orientem says:

    This is the sort of drivel one gets when liberalism has become your religion.

    ICXC NIKA
    [url=http://ad-orientem.blogspot.com/]John[/url]

  3. Peter dH says:

    I’ve been mystified over the last few months by the totally contrasting narratives offered by (some) reasserters and (some) reappraisers. For people like Hobson, liberal Anglicanism is under threat from domineering and all-powerful Evangelicals. Many Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics, on their part, feel marginalised within an Anglican/Episcopal home that once embodied the sort of orthodoxy they wish to hold on to, but no longer seems to even tolerate it.

  4. The_Archer_of_the_Forest says:

    What planet does this guy live on? Does he honestly think liberalism within the Western Anglican churches is just going to shrivel up and die?

  5. Hursley says:

    This does make sense if your understanding of the Church is completely disconnected from the concept of koinonia. Indeed, of one’s view of faith is a combination of secularism and hyper-protestant individualism, what he says rings true. I simply do not share the author’s underlying assumptions about the Church.

    In any event, both “liberalism” and “conservatism” are human concepts, and neither of them has a “future.” It is, in part, the obsession with such idols which is so destructive today. Faithfulness requires a completely different attitude.

  6. Cousin Vinnie says:

    What a load of horse excrement! I stayed in the Episcopal church for years based on the very orthodox 39 Articles. Then, I found that the so-called church was a political action organization, the Articles meant nothing and the Bible was even less authoritative.

  7. Betty See says:

    Hobson’s religion appears to be Liberalism as distinct from Christianity in general or the Anglican Church in particular and he seems to recognizes what the Unitarian Church recognized a long time ago when he says the following:
    [blockquote]The answer, as I see it, is that institutional religion is not very compatible with liberalism, at the end of the day.[/blockquote]
    What I don’t understand is why those who believe in the Liberal Religion continue to evangelize historically conservative Christian, Anglicans to convert to the Liberal faith.

    Matthew 6:24
    No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.