The GAFCON IV statement has been declared, loud and clear. The Global South has, inevitably, rejected the doctrinal direction of the Church of England and the leaership of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Anglican Commuion is dead. Long live the Church of Christ.
Global South bishops have offered to support orthodox parishes in England. What emerges is yet to be imagined. I wrote to senior figures in the evanglical consitituency in December last year about the abuse of episcopal power in England and the need to replace the House of bishops. This is the text of that letter, which I make public today in support of our Global South brothers and sisters.
…in light of the messages from the bishops and discussion by people on the ground, I had a growing sense that we need to consider the power of the House of Bishops and how evangelicals can subvert it.
Power is something we are increasingly aware of and can see being exerted in all kinds of directions. The bishops of the Church of England, it seems to me, and to many, are under enormous pressure from society and from powerful voices within the church, not least within the House of Bishops itself, to change the church’s understanding and practice of marriage. At the same time almost every diocese is facing financial crisis and even bankruptcy. In our own diocese we have only four years of liquid reserves before we are functionally bankrupt. The power of dioceses is diminishing as wealth vanishes.
General Synod has become very evenly balanced by two groups with opposing views on marriage, which are now deeply entrenched. The battles, which exhaust us all, seem to be set to continue in perpetuity, with no hope of an end to the war. Both sides are dug in. It is a stalemate as power struggles continue.
Our parishes are functionally congregational, operating alone. We have very little power at a parish level. Large, city centre churches might have the financial resources to abandon ship, if necessary, but most parishes face difficult choices, similar to our brothers and sisters in the Methodist Church and Church of Scotland.
Pastorally, we give great thanks to the Lord for the richness of theology which has emerged in the skirmishes and the wranglings over what it means to be human beings made in the image of God, male and female. We are now far better equipped to teach and pastorally care for all people in our church families and those who are drawn to living faith in Christ, who will benefit from that teaching and pastoral care.
Politically, we do not know what the House of Bishops will bring to Synod in February. In my own correspondence with [redacted]. Of course, it is not in the interests of the bishops to divide the church into separate, non-geographical provinces. Why would a Bishop want to dissolve the structures which he or she has inherited and lose power over that geographical area?
These 5 broad conditions exist
- The bishops seem ready to capitulate and fold under the pressure
- The dioceses are almost functionally bankrupt
- An ongoing argument will continue to squander our energies at a time when theological wrestling is largely complete and we’re ready to offer good teaching and pastoral care.
- The bishops will not favour visible differentiation
- Parishes are isolated and lack power.
And so my question is simple, but I don’t underestimate the difficulties in seeking to achieve a good outcome. It is a question about power.
Tony Benn asked these five questions about power and democracy, which we can ask of our bishops:
- What power have you got?
- Where did you get it from?
- In whose interests do you exercise it?
- To whom are you accountable?
- And how can we get rid of you?” If you cannot get rid of the people who govern you, you do not live in a democratic system.
Tony Benn’s questions are deeply Christian, rooted, unconsciously, in the work of Samuel Rutherford, who wrote in his seminal work, Lex Rex: “No title could be given to any man to make him king, but only the people’s election”.
Rutherford argues from the Old Testament how the consent and choice of the people was essential in making a ruler. The will of God is expressed in the will of the people. If a ruler is tyrannical, opposing the commandments and law of God, the people have the right to remove the ruler.
This moves the conversation from one of human sexuality to that of the power of the bishops.
To answer Tony Benn’s questions; the power of the bishops is power over the Church of England. They got it from the Crown Nominations Commission. They are to exercise that power in the temporal and eternal interests of God’s people, for his glory, by upholding the law and the gospel. They seem, at this time, to be accountable only to each other and there is no means for getting rid of them.
If the bishops seek to enact anything which removes the Church of England from collective obedience to the will and commandments of God, that act is tyrannical (Psalm 2), or as you put it ‘bad obedience’. It is a tyranny against God, contrary to the interests of God’s people. If our bishops do not humbly uphold the law of God and the gospel of forgiveness through repentance for sin through faith in Jesus Christ, the people have the permission to remove those bishops.
The question is then, how do we get rid of this House of Bishops, if it becomes necessary to do so? How do we elect a new house of bishops? The answer it seems to me is that we can’t, within the existing structures.
The risk, it seems to me, is that the Church of England evangelical churches will fragment and disperse, leaving behind a church in a similar state to the Methodist Church of Great Britain or the Church of Scotland.
Given this scenario, can we think of ways of collaborating, under the direction of [redacted], so that we act as one body to remove power from ungodly bishops, if necessary?
Could evangelical congregations work together to elect godly bishops? Could we, on a single day, in a single ceremony, announce that we are changing our allegiance from the current set of bishops to a newly appointed set of bishops? Nothing else changes at that point, except, perhaps, the way finances reach the Church Commissioners. Congregations would remain in place, the church commissioners would continue to pay stipends, synod members continue to function on synods. We effectively reject the ungodly authority of bishops who have rejected the will and commandments and law of God.
Parish share would need to by-pass diocesean finances. A ‘Good Stewardship Fund’ could be established for the churches which choose to change bishops together. The good stewardship fund would continue to contribute the parish shares of each parish directly to the Church Commissioners. Dioceses which already face a financial crisis would certainly not have the resources for a legal challenge to try and evict all those congregations from their buildings or vicars from their vicarages.
This is an embryonic thought, but I do think it’s one worth considering, and an action which I think the Church of England Evangelical Council might have, or could raise, the resources to establish.
The Apostle Paul told Timothy to reprove, before everyone, any elder who is sinning, so that the others may take warning. 1 Timothy 5:20.
The Church of England needs bishops who will humbly uphold the law and the gospel of Jesus Christ. If our current bishops will not listen to reproof then it is right to seek to replace them.
Transforming Grace 