What’s going on in Sydney?
Chris Sugden in Evangelicals Now, December 2008
Sydney Diocesan Synod passed a resolution in October that recognized that it is both legal and desirable for those in deacon’s orders to celebrate the Lord’s Supper. This has raised again the issue of lay people presiding at the Lord’s supper, which has long been a strongly held view in the Diocese of Sydney.
This appears to be causing some problems now.
The first is that in Anglican church order, deacons are allowed to celebrate one sacrament (baptism) but not the other, presiding at Holy Communion. The Sydney resolution appears to provide for people other than ordained presbyters to preside at Communion without the prior agreement of other Anglican Churches. This causes particular problems for those of the Anglo-Catholic tradition, for whom the way the church is ordered through bishops, priests and deacons expresses the order of the gospel. They cannot recognize a celebration of the Holy Communion as a faithful celebration unless it is taken by an ordained presbyter.
Same offence?
The concern is that, though this is about matters of church order and not matters of faith or ethics, it commits the same offence against other Anglican Churches as The Episcopal Church has done by taking unilateral action on a matter about which they are aware there is significant dispute. How can Sydney object to the unilateral action of The Episcopal Church in consecrating a bishop in an active same-sex relationship when it appears to be ready to take unilateral action itself?
The Diocese of Sydney’s case is in effect this. Sydney is increasing the number of those in diaconal orders and reserving those in presbyter’s orders for those who really do preside in a congregation as the rector or vicar. Go onto the website of many large evangelical Anglican churches in the CofE and you will find a vicar, if he/she is lucky a curate, but certainly an army of "workers", youth minister, pastoral minister, minister for home groups, minister for the elderly etc. None is ordained, and probably few have any formal theological training. Sydney appears to be trying to bring order to this by providing some form of recognition, training and commissioning by the church beyond the parish for these colleagues as deacons.
Here now comes the problem. With more deacons and less presbyters, what happens when the presbyter goes on holiday? In situations where there is no priest available, those in diaconal orders may well be allowed to preside at the Lord’s supper. One solution could be to dispense with the Lord’s supper for that time, but then the Anglican Church is a liturgical church for whom regular celebration of the Lord’s supper is important.
The Anglo-Catholic tradition has a simple answer: either use the reserved sacrament, or extended sacrament or local ordained ministers and non-stipendiary ministers. Sydney’s answer is to empower deacons to preside.
Some suggest that this represents an unbridgeable gap for the GAFCON movement. Others point out that the Sydney decision only represents an opinion at the moment, that nothing has actually been activated, and nothing has changed.
Not a stable situation
This decision would not be remarkable save for one thing: GAFCON saw a very significant coming together across the spectrum of orthodox Anglicans. Vaughan Roberts, the rector of St Ebbe’s Oxford and member of the Council of Reform has said: "GAFCON is not Reform International. I met people there who were Anglo-Catholic in culture and orthodox in heart." This coming together is full of hope for the future of Anglicanism.
It is not a stable situation at the moment. But it is not yet a broken one. It is to be sincerely hoped that in this new atmosphere of working together, the people of Sydney Diocese while expressing their biblical and pastoral concerns will be willing to continue to dialogue patiently with their fellow orthodox Anglicans; at the same time it is to be hoped that the Anglo Catholics will also be willing to listen afresh to Sydney and its mission-based concerns. This is also an opportunity to test the nature of our fellowship, as representing far more than detractors suggest, only pragmatic opportunism, but based on a willingness to work together under Scripture for the future of orthodox Anglican belief and practice.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
