We are still waiting to find out who the new Archbishop of Canterbury will be. In the meantime, the Church of Wales has appointed Cherry Van as its new Archbishop. Van is in openly same sex relationship. She has talked about having to keep her sexuality and relationship secret when serving in the Church of England.
According to Evangelicals Now, orthodox Anglicans have responded with dismay to the appointment:
““divisive rejection of the historic Biblical and Anglican teaching on marriage and human sexuality.”[1]
The Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches have stated that:
“Faithful Anglicans of the Global South will grieve that the tear in the fabric of our beloved Communion is now established at the highest level, but this will also strengthen our resolve to restore the Scriptures to their central place in our life together and build covenanted relationships through which we are able to gladly recognise one another as partners in mission and members of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church,” [2]
Here, I’m afraid, is another example of the problem that conservative evangelicals within the Anglican Communion still seem unable or unwilling to see. The point of departure for the Church of Wales came not with this appointment but many years ago. The Church of Wales has long been considered a liberal denomination, more so than the Church of England. This is the reality within the Anglican Communion. Some provinces such as Sydney would be regarded as overtly conservative evangelical, others among the Global South would be considered traditional orthodox, this may include an evangelical focus but may also include those who lean towards a more Anglo-Catholic perspective. Others including the US episcopal church and Wales are overtly liberal. The Church of England meanwhile (Canterbury and York) have attempted to offer a compromise, balancing between liberal, the different strands of evangelicalism and anglo-catholicism.
This has led, to a situation where evangelicals seem to assume that what is on offer to them is a form of pick and mix display. They can cherry pick out the bits of Anglicanism that they like whilst saying no to the less palatable bits. And in essence, that’s what they continue to ask for, the option to remain and pick and choose without having the less palatable bits imposed on them.
Yet, this is to miss two points. The first, is the one that liberals get better than English Evangelicals and one that I think other Anglicans around the world understand better. You cannot have a pick and mix approach. Liberals choose a theology which sees Scripture as imperfect, a human account of our attempts to know God. With this comes an understanding of who God is and who we as humans are. With it comes the realisation that fallible Scriptures aren’t going to provide an infallible guide to life. This means that they have a view of what morality is, especially around sexual morality. There is really no place in their church for people who go against their sexual morality in a way that they consider harmful.
Secondly, this means that if the Anglican Communion has decided that it is okay to have people in senior positions who dismiss the Evangelical understanding of God, Revelation and humanity, then having people in leadership who will reject evangelical morality becomes inevitable. I keep repeating this. The battle for orthodoxy within the Church of England and arguably within the wider Anglican communion was lost years ago when it was possible for people to remain as clergy and even be appointed to senior posts, bishops and archbishops whilst denying the infallibility of God’s Word, the virgin birth and the physical resurrection. All other decisions flow from this.
Evangelicals in the CofE really have had a choice for some time. Theoretically, they can attempt to stay and fight, though that looks rather impossible to me now and it requires more clarity on what the fight looks like. Evangelicals outside of the CofE cannot continue in effect to support brothers and sisters in a battle to keep the pick and mix display. So, really it comes down to the choice to remain and to accept that the position that their church has taken. They can either accept that position or have quite an uncomfortable existence within the church. Alternatively, and I believe this to be the better option, they can choose to leave.
[1] Global dismay at Welsh Archbishop’s election | Evangelicals Now
[2] Global dismay at Welsh Archbishop’s election | Evangelicals Now
Faithroots 