http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=14812
The Porter Pot and the Sydney Kettle
by The Revd John P. Richardson
The Ugley Vicar
August 22, 2011
Despite her criticisms of the Diocese of Sydney generally and the Jensen brothers in particular (ABC 'Religion and Ethics', 29 August 2011), Dr Muriel Porter and Archbishop Peter Jensen have one thing in common. Both agree that the Anglican Church must undergo principled, radical change.
It is when they come to the nature of and basis for those changes that they profoundly disagree.
In Dr Porter's latest book, Sydney Anglicans and the Threat to World Anglicanism (which, let the buyer beware, is actually a reworking of an earlier publication), she makes it clear that the changes she is happy to see are in core theology, personal morality and gender-related issues.
On the other hand, she regards the thirty-nine Articles of Religion - the summary statement of Anglican beliefs formulated at the Reformation, which English clergy still have to acknowledge in the 'Declaration of Assent' they make on admission to a new post - as "quaintly worded ... seriously limited ... scarcely relevant to modern Australian life" (p24 ).
Dr Porter's driving concern, which is given considerable space in her book, is that women should be ordained as priests and consecrated as bishops. And of course she can take satisfaction from the widespread acceptance of this practice in the global Anglican Communion.
She is also not fazed by the fact that the early instances of women's ordination (for example in the United States) took place in violation of existing rules. For her, such actions were a bold witness to the truth.
When it comes to the outward forms of Anglicanism, however, Dr Porter is a firm traditionalist. - or rather she is a fan of the Anglican 'style' developed by the end of the nineteenth century. She may have a twenty-first century attitude to women priests, but she is determined that they should wear the robes of an earlier era, take 'proper' services and preferably have a choir and organ accompaniment.
In short, what she longs for, by her own admission, is the Anglicanism of her Sydney childhood - what she thinks would be "a more reasonable, generous, kindly form of Anglicanism" than at present, but one where actual belief is semi-detached from the Anglican heritage of faith.
Given that she lives in Melbourne, however, one is left wondering exactly what is Dr Porter's problem. Clearly, she perceives Sydney as a sinister threat, referring to the "tentacles" of the diocese reaching "around the globe and throughout the Anglican church". From an English perspective, however, the threat of Sydney Anglicanism lies not in any political 'machinations', as Dr Porter alleges (I may be wrong, but her account of the 1998 Lambeth Conference seems decidedly far-fetched). Rather, it lies in the challenge Sydney presents to the prevailing liberal-catholic ethos.
In the words of the late Donald McKinnon, a man who had a great impact on Rowan Williams, theological liberals often combine "a nearly complete scepticism" with "an ecclesiological fundamentalism". In other words, they will cheerfully abandon traditional beliefs, but are fiercely defensive of the outward paraphernalia of church life.
Go into a theologically liberal church and you will typically find not radical contemporary worship (as you might expect) but candles, robes, sacraments, rites and rituals - that, and an almost fanatical devotion to the 'special' nature of the ordained 'priesthood'.
Muriel Porter accuses Sydney Anglicans of being 'fearful' when it comes to women's ordination. But in truth, the opposition to Sydney - at least on these shores in organs like the Church Times - is driven by a desperate fear that it undermines the one thing liberal Anglicanism has left to hold on to.
I recall one famously liberal English bishop (now retired) once saying he often doubted, but "never at the altar". Is it surprising that the fiercest reaction comes from liberals regarding Sydney's 'break with catholic order'?
It is Sydney's own 'principled radicalism' in this regard that is the real 'threat'. And sadly this colours Porter's own views, such that she (like others) takes an unfortunate delight in Sydney's financial difficulties or the limited progress of the diocesan mission - as if a wealthy and effective church would be a bad thing. Surely, though, it is the outward forms of nineteenth century Anglicanism which are "scarcely relevant to modern ... life"?
Meanwhile, Sydney is not the paradise some people here fondly imagine and it is not quite the success for which some hoped. But at least it is faithful to its principles - and that is something Dr Porter ought to admire.
The Porter Pot and the Sydney Kettle
by The Revd John P. Richardson
The Ugley Vicar
August 22, 2011
Despite her criticisms of the Diocese of Sydney generally and the Jensen brothers in particular (ABC 'Religion and Ethics', 29 August 2011), Dr Muriel Porter and Archbishop Peter Jensen have one thing in common. Both agree that the Anglican Church must undergo principled, radical change.
It is when they come to the nature of and basis for those changes that they profoundly disagree.
In Dr Porter's latest book, Sydney Anglicans and the Threat to World Anglicanism (which, let the buyer beware, is actually a reworking of an earlier publication), she makes it clear that the changes she is happy to see are in core theology, personal morality and gender-related issues.
On the other hand, she regards the thirty-nine Articles of Religion - the summary statement of Anglican beliefs formulated at the Reformation, which English clergy still have to acknowledge in the 'Declaration of Assent' they make on admission to a new post - as "quaintly worded ... seriously limited ... scarcely relevant to modern Australian life" (p24 ).
Dr Porter's driving concern, which is given considerable space in her book, is that women should be ordained as priests and consecrated as bishops. And of course she can take satisfaction from the widespread acceptance of this practice in the global Anglican Communion.
She is also not fazed by the fact that the early instances of women's ordination (for example in the United States) took place in violation of existing rules. For her, such actions were a bold witness to the truth.
When it comes to the outward forms of Anglicanism, however, Dr Porter is a firm traditionalist. - or rather she is a fan of the Anglican 'style' developed by the end of the nineteenth century. She may have a twenty-first century attitude to women priests, but she is determined that they should wear the robes of an earlier era, take 'proper' services and preferably have a choir and organ accompaniment.
In short, what she longs for, by her own admission, is the Anglicanism of her Sydney childhood - what she thinks would be "a more reasonable, generous, kindly form of Anglicanism" than at present, but one where actual belief is semi-detached from the Anglican heritage of faith.
Given that she lives in Melbourne, however, one is left wondering exactly what is Dr Porter's problem. Clearly, she perceives Sydney as a sinister threat, referring to the "tentacles" of the diocese reaching "around the globe and throughout the Anglican church". From an English perspective, however, the threat of Sydney Anglicanism lies not in any political 'machinations', as Dr Porter alleges (I may be wrong, but her account of the 1998 Lambeth Conference seems decidedly far-fetched). Rather, it lies in the challenge Sydney presents to the prevailing liberal-catholic ethos.
In the words of the late Donald McKinnon, a man who had a great impact on Rowan Williams, theological liberals often combine "a nearly complete scepticism" with "an ecclesiological fundamentalism". In other words, they will cheerfully abandon traditional beliefs, but are fiercely defensive of the outward paraphernalia of church life.
Go into a theologically liberal church and you will typically find not radical contemporary worship (as you might expect) but candles, robes, sacraments, rites and rituals - that, and an almost fanatical devotion to the 'special' nature of the ordained 'priesthood'.
Muriel Porter accuses Sydney Anglicans of being 'fearful' when it comes to women's ordination. But in truth, the opposition to Sydney - at least on these shores in organs like the Church Times - is driven by a desperate fear that it undermines the one thing liberal Anglicanism has left to hold on to.
I recall one famously liberal English bishop (now retired) once saying he often doubted, but "never at the altar". Is it surprising that the fiercest reaction comes from liberals regarding Sydney's 'break with catholic order'?
It is Sydney's own 'principled radicalism' in this regard that is the real 'threat'. And sadly this colours Porter's own views, such that she (like others) takes an unfortunate delight in Sydney's financial difficulties or the limited progress of the diocesan mission - as if a wealthy and effective church would be a bad thing. Surely, though, it is the outward forms of nineteenth century Anglicanism which are "scarcely relevant to modern ... life"?
Meanwhile, Sydney is not the paradise some people here fondly imagine and it is not quite the success for which some hoped. But at least it is faithful to its principles - and that is something Dr Porter ought to admire.
No comments:
Post a Comment