Reform ‘vindicated by events’ Rod Thomas – chair elect
Church of England Newspaper
Reform is a puzzle to some. Our critics like to characterise us as schismatic: always threatening to pick up our toys and play elsewhere. Yet time and again the message from Reform itself is that its members are committed to the Church of England.
So which is it? At the Reform conference this month, David Holloway, the vicar of Jesmond, explained why Reform is both at home in, and yet uneasy with the Church of England. Mr Holloway pointed out that there wasn’t just one reformation in the 16th century. There were many, in different countries. But, he argued, the English tradition was the best of the reformed traditions; to lose it would be a tragedy not just here, but for the whole Church of God.
Some people tend to think of the Church of England as having positioned itself halfway between Rome and Geneva. But it has never occupied the middle ground in terms of its theological position. That has always been rooted in the 39 Articles, the Book of Common Prayer and the Homilies.
It would be more accurate to describe the Church as ‘moderate’ rather than ‘in the middle,’ because the genius of the English reformation was to furnish us with clarity in doctrine, but comprehensiveness in ‘things indifferent’. In other words, unlike the way non-conformism developed, our creeds expressed the essentials of doctrine, but our comprehensiveness expressed our tolerance over matters of secondary importance.
The essentials have always included recognition of the supreme authority of Scripture. Tradition and reason help to make it evident that the Scriptures are the oracles of God, but the Reformers would have been horrified to think that the Church regarded them as equal authorities. This understanding explains why evangelicals in Reform are relaxed over some issues, yet refuse to budge on others like the uniqueness of Christ, his propitiatory sacrifice on the cross, and the authority of the Bible.
Critics say that our attachment to these fundamentals when we proclaim the gospel of grace, oppose inter-faith services or stand firm on human sexuality is evidence of a schismatic tendency. We see it – to use Hooker’s expression – as ‘our plain duty to God’. None of us know what the future holds for the Church. Reform will continue to play its part in synodical structures, even though these are only ever likely to reflect current doctrinal confusion. It will set up arrangements that model good practice as it is now doing with a ‘Panel of Reference’ which seeks to provide guidance for the process of ordination. It will support those whose stand for the Gospel forces them into ‘irregular’ action. It will refuse association with leaders whose actions are clearly contrary to Scripture and its members will be likely to express this by the way they provide financial support to the wider church. We realise we need to win hearts and minds for effective action. So, as Tony Blair used to put it in another context, our role must also be ‘education, education, education.’
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
