Beating the Bounds

A Symphonic Approach to Orthodoxy in the Anglican Communion

Green

• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Year: 2013
• eBook ISBN: 9781621896869
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Religion

Using the form of the classical symphony as an analytical and critical tool, Sidney Green examines the concepts of orthodoxy and heresy and their historical development in the Christian church and applies those to the confessional approach of the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON). Using examples from history of the early church, the Reformation, and the contemporary emerging church, Green examines how the concept of boundaries and the exercise of ecclesiastical authority have been applied. Contemporary attempts to respond to the postmodern paradigm producing a neo-dynamic view of orthodoxy, including radical ideas in the area of sexuality, are examined.Recognizing a dynamism in Anglican orthodoxy that is still very much alive alongside present attempts of conservative minorities to impose their view on the Communion--sometimes by very devious means--the distinctives of Anglican ecclesiology are discussed in the belief that ecclesiology is the outward expression of what theologically undergirds Anglican orthodoxy. Current attempts to bring harmony and stability in place of fracture and dissonance culminating in the suggestion of an Anglican Covenant are examined. Possible alternate ways forward are suggested centered on the primacy of love.

1

Movement One: The Church in Conflict (Allegro)

The Exposition

In classical symphonic form the exposition is the place where the composer exposes the main themes that will form the structure of the movement. The symphony usually begins with the declaration of a principal subject, which firmly establishes the key and feel of the movement.

This is then transformed through a bridge passage into a second subject. This second subject is often much more lyrical and sweeter than the principal subject. It is also in a different key and gradually builds up for the next section, known as the closing section because it closes the exposition in the new key. In many symphonies, the composer introduces completely new material in this section.

Principal subject: Orthodoxy as “Heavenly Gift”

The classic theme or theory of orthodoxy has generally been the view that the church kept pure and untainted the teaching of Jesus and the apostles. Heresy, therefore, is seen as anything that was a departure and offshoot from that pure teaching. This view sees the rise of heresy as the prophesied “satanic” attack on the church and, consequently, an attack on Jesus Christ himself. In Hebrews 6:4 the writer describes true belief as a form of enlightenment empowered by the Holy Spirit and based on the word of God. To have such belief is a foretaste of the eschatological age to come. Such belief is seen as “the heavenly gift.” To subsequently reject that gift is described in terms that make such an act the unforgivable sin. 1

The classic theory also contrasted truth and heresy in a simplistic way, believing that the truth is one whereas heresy is multifaceted, diverse, and self-contradictory. Truth was also seen as universal, hence the epithet “catholic” could be applied, whereas heresy was seen as something that simply occurred in local areas and was really a mixture of pure Christian teaching and pagan philosophies.

Such a view inevitably locked the concept of orthodoxy in the past as a static treasure trove of truth, almost as though dropped down from heaven through the mouth of Jesus to his apostles and then, through them, to the church. This was some golden age towards which the church was bound to look as it sought to deal with the theological questions that each age raised.

Greenslade reminds us that to look back in yearning to those early days as “the undivided church” is as little justified as it is to look back at any supposed “Mediaeval Age of Faith, or a godly reformed Church.” He questions what it is we rest on when we ascribe the authority we give to the early fathers. “Is it their antiquity or their catholicity? And if the latter, do we assume a priori, that because they lived without constricting denominations, the unhampered flow of Christian life and thought, like blood circulating freely in a healthy body, must have preserved their doctrine from error, at least from errors of distortion?”2

He encourages us to be realistic about the realities of personal ambition, nationalism, and, of course, plain human sinfulness that marred their fellowship with God and with each other just as it does ours. The great wealth of Christian literature and thought we have from their days was not available to them in their own day because books were scarce and travel limited. That was, of course, because “. . . many of the greatest Greek Fathers read no Latin theology, many of the greatest Latins little Greek (and) some Christian literature was sealed to both Greeks and Romans.”3

Bridge passage: Orthodoxy as “Dynamic”

In the traditional symphonic form this passage within the first movement, often incomplete in feeling, leads into a completely new and conflicting theme.

Stephen Sykes, in his essay “Orthodoxy and Liberalism” refers his readers to the thought of Professor Daniel Hardy who, in contrast to that static view, argues for a “. . . dynamic understanding of ‘orthodoxy’ . . . a way of inhabiting the Christian tradition which involves hard conceptual work. . . .”4

For Sykes, to be orthodox is not a matter of lazily repeating the decisions and arguments of the past to meet each new critical proposal. The transformational dynamic of orthodoxy is only in evidence where theologians fully accept the contemporary task of uncovering presuppositions, analysing arguments and engaging in vigorous dialogue.

Michael Jinkins reminds us that a generation ago an ecclesiology would begin with looking at the biblical foundations and would be seen, through very rose-coloured spectacles, as a homogeneous community. Others, he says, might begin with “. . . historical/doctrinal examination of the traditions and credal formulae regarding ‘Church’ and they would be seen as prescriptive for the life of the contemporary church as a formula—what Origen called the ‘Norm.’”

This view has been challenged as a true picture from the Bible or the early communities of faith, which should be more realistically seen as a “. . . polymorphic cloud of witnessing communities whose shape changes with the times and locales, the winds and other atmospheric necessities of pluralistic communities in different context bearing sacred traditions often at variance with other communities of faith.”5

Jinkins reflects on the different facets of Christian theology clearly demonstrated in the life and witness of each of the Johannine, Pauline, Jerusalem, and Palestinian communities.

Second Subject: Orthodoxy as the Winners’ Triumph

The first significant writing to undermine the traditional view of orthodoxy was the seminal work of Walter Bauer. 6 It was written in German in the 1930s but, because of the restrictions that surrounded the Nazi era in Germany, it was only translated into English in the 1970s.

Bauer paints a picture of an early church where, from the very beginning, differing emphases and doctrines abound and where nothing is, as yet, set in stone.

Bauer claimed that there were so many different branches that it was impossible for them to unite and so they fragmented and were weakened. It was only the rise of the influence of the church at Rome that eventually brought some sort of order into this maelstrom of theological ideas.

Rome was the centre of what became orthodoxy and, although smaller at first, was so well organized that it was able to extend its influence into the east and establish itself as the “orthodox” form of Christianity, especially after the “conversion” of the Emperor Constantine.

This Roman dominance was due, in the most part, to its superior organisation and the fact that episcopal leadership enabled strong leadership, especially under what he called “the grand villain the Bishop of Rome.” Bauer claims that orthodoxy in the West up to AD 451 was simply the Roman view. Heresy was any other view.7

Closing Section: Orthodoxy in the Mind of God?

Although not an essential part of the first movement of a symphony, here the composer often can introduce some completely new material.

Acknowledging his debt to Bauer, David Christie-Murray reminds us that, while it is relatively easy to define heresy as a deviation from orthodoxy, it is much more difficult to actually define orthodoxy. He goes as far as to imagine the cynic saying that “heretics are simply the minority who differ from the contemporary majority view.”8

However, it is clear he does not fully agree with the cynics, preferring, rather, to question the possibility of finding a perfect orthodoxy, which, he says, may have to come from some sort of Platonic view that see...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Acknowledgments
• Foreword
• Prologue
• Introduction
• 1: Movement One: The Church in Conflict (Allegro)
• 2: Movement Two: The Church Thinking
• 3: Movement Three: The Church as Anglican
• 4: Movement Four: The Church as Community
• 5: Coda Finale
• 6: Cadenza
• Bibliography