Bishop Alan Wilson–It’s time for the Church of England to drop the culture wars

Almost three thousand years ago the Prophet Amos asked ”˜can two walk together except they be agreed?’ How can the Church of England, pragmatic and volunteer-led but with complex legal and cultural structures, stay meshed with its culturally incompatible overseas churches? What is its future?

Theo Hobson argues in this week’s Spectator that the C of E needs to find a third way in order to survive, affirming gay partnerships whilst simultaneously rejecting equal marriage.

Can this be done? If the deadlock Hobson describes arose from a frail incoherent compromise, Some Issues in Human Sexuality, how can more hand-wringing duplicity solve it?

The world has moved radically on since 1991….

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * Culture-Watch, - Anglican: Analysis, --Civil Unions & Partnerships, Anglican Provinces, Anthropology, Church of England (CoE), CoE Bishops, Ethics / Moral Theology, Marriage & Family, Religion & Culture, Same-sex blessings, Sexuality, Sexuality Debate (in Anglican Communion), Theology, Theology: Scripture

5 comments on “Bishop Alan Wilson–It’s time for the Church of England to drop the culture wars

  1. Peter dH says:

    [blockquote]Increasingly, homosexuality is openly discussed by Evangelicals who want to be good news to real people, not just tolerantly patronising.[/blockquote]… bishop Wilson said patronisingly.
    [blockquote]The strength of Christianity, historically, has been its ability to cross frontiers, transcend different cultures and adapt.[/blockquote]Blatantly revisionist history. The strength of Christianity has been to hold on firmly to the faith once delivered while reformulating it into a wide range of different cultural contexts. Right from the outset, Christianity proper has understood that it cannot bow the knee to Caesar regardless of the cultural pressures brought to bear on it.
    [blockquote]Are there limits to inclusivity? … The Church cannot simultaneously embody justice and injustice. It cannot expect people to believe its welcoming noises if they really mean no more than a resounding ‘yes, but…’[/blockquote]Unless, good bishop, [b]every[/b] sinner is welcomed with a resounding ‘yes, but…’. That’s every single one of us. I thought that was basic Reformed theology. Justification is by faith, but that doesn’t make sanctification an optional extra for those that can be bothered.

    This piece is shocking. Shocking because the tired, debunked and deliberately inflammatory “racism” analogy is used by a bishop who is supposed to be a figure of unity in his diocese and the wider church. Shocking because no theological awareness of the orthodox position is evident – out of polemical choice? Because the bishop genuinely has none? Neither is palatable. Shocking because it chooses to fight its dirty little polemical fight through the secular press, precisely the sort of thing that is poisoning the Church of England and its gospel witness right now. Shocking because few will think this piece remarkable in any way.

  2. David Keller says:

    Peter, I was glad to read someone else saw the blatant racism in this article.

  3. driver8 says:

    Slightly ironic from one of the principal culture war warriors in the CofE leadership. Lovely advice we can all surely agree on – will everyone else shut their mouths whilst the Bishop’s views are put into effect.

  4. Sarah1 says:

    RE: “Slightly ironic from one of the principal culture war warriors in the CofE leadership.”

    That’s one of Alan Wilson’s amusing custom rhetorical calling cards — accuse his orthodox opponents in the Anglican Communion of doing things which he then himself does in the accusatory article. I’ve never seen someone write with such self-congratulation and such complete and utter lack of self-awareness at the same time. It’s like a bald man congratulating himself publicly on having such a full head of hair.

    RE: “Shocking because no theological awareness of the orthodox position is evident – out of polemical choice?”

    It’s polemical choice. He won’t define the orthodox position accurately because he wants to set up a lot of straw men to knock down in a blaze of glory in front of his admirers.

    I take it as an inner awareness on his part that he’s not competent or skilled enough to debate the [i]actual[/i] conservative viewpoints — “debate insecurity,” as it were. So all he can do is talk cheap.

  5. William Witt says:

    [blockquote]The strength of Christianity, historically, has been its ability to cross frontiers, transcend different cultures and adapt.[/blockquote]

    As is evident throughout TEC’s “To Set Our Hope on Christ,” this is THE single identity of the current theological left. Except, of course, when it comes to the geographical boundaries of TEC dioceses. That is one kind of boundary-crossing that falls before the infallible finality of the Dennis Canon.