Some thoughts on the present tension between youth and age in the body Anglican

It is said that no good deed goes unpunished. After more than a century of missionary work outside our borders, American churches are now experiencing an unintended consequence: The younger churches, flexing their muscles, are raising challenges that, in some cases, are reinforcing internal church divisions in this country, threatening to split apart the bonds of unity and assistance that brought the fledglings into being. In this first article of an intended series, a veteran church-watcher notes how this historical irony is playing out in his own communion, notably the Episcopal/Anglican churches of the United States and Africa. -Publisher By Don Hanway Like its parent, the Church of England, the Episcopal Church in the United States has been a missionary body, founding and supporting many new churches overseas. These younger churches are now growing up, in numbers and assertiveness, and are feeling their powers, notably churches in Africa. It is a situation not unlike that of parents and their teenage offspring, who are adult in size and inclined to question the judgment and authority of those who brought them into being. The life situation of teens is different from that of their parents, and so is their outlook. In many ways the African churches, such as the Church of Nigeria, resemble evangelical churches in America, in matters of style and biblical interpretation, more than they do their stodgier Episcopal “parents.” So we see now the curious situation of Third World churches taking their progenitors to task over the issue of homosexuality. In African cultures, gays come out of the closet only at their peril, not daring to claim equal moral standing with their heterosexual church family members. The idea of ordaining an admitted homosexual, especially elevating such a one to the office of bishop, or blessing a gay union, is anathema in most parts of Africa, where there is much less awareness than in America of the life experience of the gay minority. South Africa, thanks to the leadership of its former Archbishop Desmond Tutu, is a notable exception. The view of other African churches is akin to that of U.S. evangelicals, who hold being gay to be a disorder or a lamentable moral choice. In the face of desperate human needs and the challenge of militant Islam, African churches do not see themselves as having the luxury of elevating concerns of justice for a gay minority to a place of priority. Further, a selective literal reading of the Bible, highlighting the handful of passages seemingly dismissive of gays, works well in attracting persons of more limited education, in Africa as in America. Africans are no less pragmatic than Americans when it comes to church growth. It is a curious, and perhaps not generally known, fact that fundamentalist Christianity, which showcases a selectively literal interpretation of the Bible, is not a recovery of ancient orthodoxy, but a 20th century development in response to modernism and the rise of science. Insistence on the inerrancy of Holy Scripture was one of the “fundamentals” of faith put in place as a bulwark against erosion of confidence in conservative church teachings. It was a response of fear more than fidelity. The question that courageous Christians must ask themselves today is: Do the ends to be served in securing the faith justify the means used, which amount to making the words of the Bible, rather than God, the primary allegiance? At best bibliolatry is wishful thinking. At worst, it is dishonest and a sin denounced by Scripture itself. In historic Anglicanism as set forth by Richard Hooker in his Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, a response to both Puritans and Roman Catholics, the authority of church teaching is secured not by appeal to Scripture alone but by a respectful conversation among three community voices: a careful and critical reading of the Bible, using the best scholarship available; the guidance of the accrued wisdom of the Body, which we call “tradition,” and which is not fossilized but still open to amendment; and the application of the God-given faculty of human reason, which includes reflection upon contemporary experience. In short, for Anglicans in the historic mainstream, the Word of God to the church today is not enshrined in a book with one infallible interpretation: it is a Living Word heard within the community of believers who are seeking to be faithful to Jesus in the circumstances of their own day. Ever since the bloody struggles of Catholic versus Protestant in England came to an end under Queen Elizabeth I, Anglicans have been leery of establishing any formularies of belief beyond the ancient creeds and Scripture, drawing lines to rule some believers in and others out. The genius of Anglicanism for four centuries has been common worship, respectful of the conscience of each individual believer and of each sovereign national church. Common worship has emphasized our mutual recognition that Jesus is lord of the church, more than our disagreements on lesser points of doctrine. What can the burgeoning churches in Africa offer Americans, and what do they need from us? What can they legitimately expect from us? Above all, it seems to me, Third World churches offer examples of great vitality and courage in the face of suffering and persecution. We need their witness, and we need to be in touch with human need as closely as they are. They have no right, however, to dictate how we should live faithfully in our own cultural context, and especially how we should interpret and apply the Bible in our context. What do they need from us? They need our witness to a universal Gospel that crosses not only racial and geographic boundaries, but also boundaries of different experience based on different sexual orientation. Teenagers still have a thing or two to learn from their parents, and it is likely that in years to come we may seem to them to have been trail-breaking pioneers in welcoming and affirming our gay brothers and sisters as moral equals, standing upon a common foundation of God’s grace in Jesus. What we First World Christians need to do is to live and articulate a Gospel that is true to Jesus—one that challenges the false gods of money and militarism and follows in Christ’s way of self-giving love.