What Went Wrong...

My last post, some weeks ago, lamented the end of a journey. I have been able to give some thought to that journey and have reached a few conclusions.

Several years ago, I started down a path inspired by Tom Oden's "Rebirth of Orthodoxy". I may have misunderstood a bit of what he was saying in that book, but here is what I thought was the central thesis:

The "God-breathed" scriptures are alone the final authority by virtue of their inspiration, but the history of orthodoxy is the history of exegesis, and as such is a path toward greater Christian unity.

As I understood Oden, tradition has great value as a guide to the interpretation of scripture, but scripture remains the objective source of Christian truth. Whatever authority is given to tradition is secondary and derivitive and must be rooted in the Biblical text.

I saw in the Anglican doctrinal statement, the 39 Articles of Religion, a beautiful balance of absolute commitment to scripture as the final authority with respect for the history of how the church has understood scripture. Traditon, if one reads the articles in a normative fashion, is never allowed to assert as "necessary for salvation" anything that is outside the limiting boundaries of the Biblical text. This is why I chose one particular path and rejected others. I was never quite willing to reconsider Rome or follow other evangelicals to Eastern Orthodoxy because my evangelical commitment to the authority of scripture would not allow it, no matter how much I respected aspects of the early church that seemed compatible with either. For both Catholics and Orthodox, tradition plays a role that in some way subordinates the written Biblical text. The 39 Articles clearly insisted that whatever role the creeds, the liturgy and tradition may play, the source and limit is always the writte Word.

But the Anglo-Catholic influences, present in Anglicanism since the Reformation and increasingly prevalent since the days of the Tractarian movement, seems to have introduced an understanding of the role of tradition that goes "beyond what is written". Nineteenth century polemicists like J.C. Ryle were harshly critical of the "ritualism" introduced by Pusey, Newman and others, practices which had a place in the history of Christianity, but did not have a clear warrant in the text of scripture. The use of vestments, candles, incense, particular arrangement of church furniture all came under scrutiny as the excesses of the "traditions of men".

The End of a Journey

Three years ago I waded into the via media of Anglicanism. When I searched for a "middle way" I was attracted to Anglicanism for one primary reason - the Anglican Statement of faith known as the Thirty-Nine Articles. I was disillusioned with the fragmentation of the evangelical movement and burned out from a series of difficult congregational church situations.

I wanted the doctrinal stability of the creed and the tangible experience of weekly celebration of the Lord's supper. My desire for a connection to the history of the church in the creeds, in a view of baptism and the Lord's Supper as more than just symbols found a worthy statement of faith - the 39 Articles of Religion. I saw in "Global South" influenced Anglicanism a respect for the history of the faith that I hoped would mitigate some of the conflict over interpretations of scripture without losing sight of the Reformation principle that it is the Scripture and not the church that is the final authority.

In the 39 articles I found the following things:

Defending Obama by Smearing Your Dad

Frank Schaeffer seems hell bent on not only cutting all ties to conservative evangelicals but seems determined to stab the them in the heart, being not the least bit ashamed to stomp on his father's grave to do so.

Frank writes a blog for the Huffington Post, the same site that Fox News tried to confront over comments rejoicing over things like the cancer of Tony Snow. Frank recently defended Barack Obama over the firestorm of his association with Pastor Jeremiah Wright. He has every right to support Obama if he wishes, but the gist of his defense is rather incendiary.

Obama is in trouble for a 20-year association with a pastor whose theology identifies the gospel with liberation from white supremacy. Reverend Jeremiah Wright has been associated with the theology of James Cone, a theology that includes notions such as "Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community.

Somebody Who Understands Schaeffer

Few people I speak to have read significantly from Francis Schaeffer. Many who have mistakenly critique him as a clone of his mentor Cornelius Van Til, or a populist who got too involved with conservative politics. In light of his son's disturbing attacks on him in his novels and most recent book, which I refuse to even name, I found the following article by Christopher Tinker and Melvin Tinker very refreshing. These guys actually understand what Schaeffer was trying to do and why it remains significant and relevant.

Fifty Years On: The Legacy of Francis Schaeffer - An Apologetic for Post-Moderns not only summarizes Schaeffer well, it points out why the collective provocations of Tony Jones, Brian McLaren and Doug Pagitt are so distressing.

They state regarding Schaeffer's most basic point about modernism "‘Rationality and faith are totally out of contact with each other.’ This is where modern man was left, in a state of despair. He could understand nature (lower storey) as a closed system rationalistically, but meaning (upper storey), in terms of purpose and significance, were unattainable and continued to elude him. The only way in which meaning could be found was to look to the upper storey where all rationality must be abandoned."

In other words, modernism was left saying that we could have objective knowledge about the material world, but the spiritual world was beyond science and reason. So anything related to the spirit, such as meaning, purpose, love, significance, had to be completely separated from the category called "knowledge". God may exist, but we can know nothing of him. For all practical purposes, all spiritual truth is unattainable if it exists at all.

The Three Faces of Anglicanism - The Revisionists

I have been trying my darndest to figure out what best describes the essentials of Anglicanism. I fear, from time to time, that what defines Anglicanism is the notion of "peace at all costs". Unity at the expense of truth. As a result there appear to me to be three almost entirely incompatable belief systems in the Church of England and its daughter organizations that somehow coexist organically, but present a confusing picture to the world.

I have written before about the "revisionist" wing of the Anglican Communion. I won't rehearse it all here, instead, just a few notes on the historical development, with a bit more focus on the 39 Articles.

JI Packer speaks of the 39 Articles in these terms. They come to the Anglican church:

"... as prior judgements, time-honoured judgements, on specific issues relating to the faith of Christ, as set forth in the Scriptures. They come to us as corporate decisions first made by the Church centuries ago, and now confirmed and commended to us by the corroborative testimony of all later generations that have accepted them, down to our time.... It is a prime obligation for Anglicans to take full account of the expository formulations to which our Church has bound itself; and to ignore them, as if we were certain that the Spirit of God had no hand in them, is no more warrantable than to treat them as divinely inspired and infallible."

This is the balance that ought to be applied to all doctrinal statements - not infallible, but not malleable. But in our pluralistic culture, where modernism and postmodernism have both managed to undercut all confidence in the existence of fixed truths and of a language that can communicate such truths, the Articles of Religion, like most other statements of religious belief, become quite flexible.

Just Another Thought on Piper

My reaction to John Piper's recent article was strong. That was because his words were extremely troubling. I felt personally wounded by the idea that Arminianism is a "threat to the atonement", because I value the atonement highly. Two further thoughts.

One: Definitions matter. Arminian theology is not Pelagian, nor is it open theism. Arminians believe God is sovereign. The only real question is how. Arminians believe God's foreknowledge is not dependent on an eternal decree. Regarding the gospel, Arminians believe human beings are completely and utterly fallen, unable to in any way affect their own salvation. Arminians believe salvation is a gift that is completely and totally unmerited. In this regard, Arminians are in lock step with Calvinists.

Where the divergence comes is at the point where the atonement becomes limited (a notion nowhere explicitly taught in scripture) and particularly the point where God might be accused of causing the very evil Christ came to remedy.

John Piper Calls Arminianism a "Threat to the Atonement"

I generally have liked John Piper, in spite of his strongly Calvinist views. I've been a two-point Calvinist (Arminian) most of my life. I have blogged about the subject extensively. So I have to admit a bit of disappointment that Piper has essentially concluded that Arminians are enemies of the gospel. Or more accurately, a "threat to the atonement". He writes in the outline to a message "How I Distinguish Between the Gospel and False Gospels":

"There are many today, as in every day, who bring to the Bible the presupposition that sinful man must have the power of self-determination in order to be held accountable by God. This is not a biblical presupposition. It threatens to undermine the gospel because it pushes people away from believing that God can plan and bring to pass the sins that are essential to the death of his Son.

"We don’t usually think about Arminianism as a threat to the atonement. It usually comes in at the point of the accomplishment of the gospel and the offer of the gospel, not the point of the plan of the events of the gospel. But here we see that there is an intrinsic incompatibility between the basic Arminian presupposition and the gospel as including a set of planned sins against the Son of God. That presupposition is that for humans to be morally accountable agents they must have the ultimate power of self-determination at all those points where they are found blameworthy or praiseworthy.

Evangelicalism The New Mainline (Liberalism Part 2)

Bob Burney has an excellent article on the future of the Evangelcal movement on Townhall.

Key passages:

"A few decades ago liberal theologians gained control of the (mainline) seminaries. Instead of teaching their pastoral and theological students to love, trust and revere the Bible as God’s inspired, inerrant revelation to mankind, they were taught to question, doubt and debate the claims of Scripture. To question truth became the ultimate objective rather than discovering truth. The “search” was not a part of the journey, it was the destination.

The Three Faces of Anglicanism - The Anglo-Catholics

I was raised Catholic. I spent most of my life in free-church congregational churches. Two years ago I cautiously waded into Anglican waters. It made sense to find a "middle ground", one that respected the history of the church and the history of Biblical interpretation for all of 20 centuries. It did not make sense to me to cross the Tiber to Rome, or to embrace the eastern church, simply because the Great Tradition seemed to me to add external things to the Biblical testimony and seemed to force interpretations on the text that could not be supported except through appeal to some mystical inside knowledge and unique revelatory authority granted to the church hierarchy.

As a layman, one who was seeking connection with the early church and who after months of thinking, praying and research into doctrine, I settled on the 39 Articles as a worthy balance between Biblical, Evangelical faith and historic worship and polity. I was fully aware of the liberal slant of the Episcopal church, but was also heartened to find a few Anglican groups who claimed to combine history, biblical authority and the power of the spirit into one Biblical and Evangelical movement. Anglo-Catholicism was not part of my research, but I assumed that the 39 Articles held sway even in those circles. So I must admit a certain degree of shock upon reading the following from the Anglican Missal

"I confess to God Almighty, to Blessed Mary Ever-Virgin, to blessed Michael the Archangel, to blessed John the Baptist, to the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, to all the Saints, and to thee, Father, that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word and deed, by my fault, by my own fault, by my own most grievous fault. Wherefore I beg blessed Mary Ever-Virgin, blessed Michael the Archangel, blessed John the Baptist, the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, all the Saints, and thee, father, to pray for me to the Lord our God."

How did a prayer to Michael the Archangel, Mary and apostolic saints appear in a worship liturgy if the 39 Articles specifically proscribed prayers to saints?

Os Guinness on Frank Schaeffer

Os Guinness has, thankfully, written a review of Frank Schaeffer's disturbing expose' Crazy For God. This is a detailed rebuttal from someone who was there. People need to read the whole thing, and pray for Franky. He is truly a bit of a lost soul.

Larry Norman - Rest in Peace

Larry Norman passed away on Sunday. He was 61. I was probably about 12 when I first heard Larry's music and saw him perform in Missoula, Montana. I had never seen anything like Larry Norman and never have since. He was part Bob Dylan, part Bill Cosby and part John the Baptist. With just a nylon string guitar, a thin tenor and a razor sharp wit, he spellbound me and influenced me forever.

Larry's songwriting was deceptively simple and deep. He was the originator of Contemporary Christian Music, but few these days really understand his genius. What made Larry's music powerful in the early days was the way in which he tied spiritual urgency to the full spectrum of 1960s American life. He wrote songs about the Vietnam war, about drug abuse and sexual promiscuity. He wrote about false religions, the commercialization of Christmas, and a decidedly Hal Lindsey influenced understanding of end-times prophecy. He was fearless in his naming the name of Christ, yet knew how to be blunt at times and deftly subtle at others. Only Visiting This Planet remains, in my mind, the best Christian rock recording ever, recorded in London with the fifth Beatle, George Martin as producer.

The Three Faces of Anglicanism - The Evangelicals

To understand the “evangelical face” of Anglicanism, one first needs a bit of history of the Anglican church to put things in context.

It is commonly believed that Henry VIII broke from the Roman church over a marriage, but the issue was a bit deeper than that. Henry’s main issue was whether the Pope should have power over the needs of the English State, particularly his own need of an heir to the Royal throne. In the 16th century, both Popes and Kings held secular and sacred authority. Henry's intent was to free the English Church from Papal rule. He sought out bishops who would side with him to annul a barren marriage and declared, in essence, that the English Church was simply put, English.

But Henry’s doctrine remained decidedly Catholic. In his “Six Articles”, he fully affirmed such Catholic doctrines as Transubstantiation, Communion in one kind, clerical celibacy, and auricular confession.

The cleric who Henry chose to lead his English church was Thomas Cranmer. Cranmer became quite familiar with the Reformation in Europe and his doctrine was very much influenced by the Reformers. Cranmer proceeded to create a liturgy and a prayer book for England, in the native tongue. To do so, he borrowed from what he felt were the best liturgies of previous centuries, but he took pains to remove, over time, many of the elements of those liturgies that echoed the concerns of the Reformers. Eventually, a few central points of doctrine were summarized in what is now known as the 39 Articles of Religion.

The Three Faces of Anglicanism

I have been swimming in Anglican waters for approximately two and a half years. In the course of that time I have been keenly aware of the divide that exists between the conservative and orthodox as opposed to the progressive and liberal wing. This divide is vividly being played out as conservative Anglicans leave the Episcopal church in the United States and seek refuge from conservative bishops in the global south.

But what I was not fully aware of is a divide that lurks beneath the surface, hidden by the more pressing matter of essential orthodoxy and moral heresy. I am coming to understand that Anglicanism consists of three distinct groupings, and I will do my best to describe them here.

Wisdom from Down Under

Being a devotee of Francis Schaeffer, for whom the "propositional truth" of the scriptures was the cornerstone of all knowledge, I've always bristled at the contention, quite common these days among emergents and post-conservatives, that propositional truth is a false hope of the enlightenment. Always struck me as odd - isn't the statement "propositional truth is false" itself a proposition?

Many - I think most are well meaning - will say that revelation is not found in propositional statements about God, but in God's saving acts in history, that it is the Acts that are revelatory and not the verbal descriptions of them.

So I was tickled, when googling a different topic, to find this article by Evangelical Anglican Canon D.B. Knox, who I don't know much about, save that he was Principal of Moore Theological College, Sydney, Australia, from 1959-1985. The article is titled "PROPOSITIONAL REVELATION, THE ONLY REVELATION".