By Kwok Pui Lan
The
Church of England and the Episcopal Church of the United States have decided
not to adopt the present form of the Anglican Covenant. Many wonder what will be the future of the
Anglican Communion.
 |
| Kwok Pui Lan at Canterbury Cathedral |
The Windsor
Report of 2004 first proposed the idea of a pan-Anglican covenant to set out
common doctrine of the Anglican Church, relationships in the Communion, and ways
to resolve conflicts among member churches. Archbishop Rowan Williams assigned
a Covenant Design Group and a final version was released in December 2009 for
adoption of constituent provinces.
Unlike
the Roman Catholic Church, which has a clear hierarchal structure, the Anglican
Communion is a family of 38 provinces, with dispersed authority across the
Communion. The Archbishop of Canterbury enjoys a primacy of honor (primus
inter pares), but has no legal jurisdiction over other parts of the
Communion. The resolutions of the Lambeth Conference (the meeting of Anglican
bishops every ten years) are not binding, but are seen as advisory for the
autonomous member churches.
Such a
structure can no longer hold the Communion together when it is increasingly
multilingual, multicultural, and postcolonial. The issues of ordination of
women priests and bishops and homosexuality have threatened the unity of the
church and the bonds of affection.
At the
end of March, I had the chance to meet with Archbishop Williams (right) at Lambeth
Palace with a group of Anglican women theologians. Shortly before our meeting,
we heard that a majority of the dioceses of the Church of England would not
accept the Anglican Covenant. The Archbishop told us that he was disappointed
with the outcome and expressed regret that during his tenure he was not able to
bring the Communion closer together.
The
Episcopal Church participated in the discussion of the Anglican Covenant in
good faith. It has responded to the several drafts with thoughtfulness and
care. Several theologians and church leaders have produced The Genius of Anglicanism to educate the public about the different facets of the Covenant. Professor
Fredrica Harris Thompsett, Mary Wolfe Professor of Historical Theology and
faculty emerita of the Episcopal Divinity School, is one of the contributors.
She has been newly elected
to the Executive Council of the Episcopal Church at the General Convention last
July.
The
Anglican Covenant is problematic because its ecclesiology (doctrine of the
church) is backward looking and outdated. First, it reinforces a top-down
understanding of the church, in which authority is concentrated at the top. The
Covenant asks the church to “proclaim a pattern of theological and moral
reasoning” based on Scripture and the catholic and apostolic faith. It places
the primary responsibility of biblical interpretation in the hands of bishops
and synods, although the study of lay and ordained should be taken into
account. Instead of welcoming the plurality of interpretation, the Covenant is
cautious about diversity in interpretation.
Second,
the Covenant does not have an adequate theology of the laity. The Covenant
mentions the word “laity” only twice. The Covenant mentions baptism as one of
the two sacraments, but does not speak about the baptismal ministry that all
believers are called to do. The bishops are set apart, as if they only need to
talk with each other, and they are not part of the laos (the whole
people of God).
Third,
the Covenant disregards the church reform movements and liberative impulses
across the churches in the second half of the twentieth century. People who
have been marginalized—women, the youth, the poor, racial and ethnic
minorities, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people—are demanding
their voices to be heard. The basic church communities in Latin America offer a
model of church that is anti-clerical, egalitarian, and participatory.
The
Covenant has been rejected by several provinces. Now what?
The
Chinese word “crisis” implies both danger and opportunity. For me, this
provides an excellent opportunity for the church to enter into a process that
Brazilian theologian Leonardo Boff has called Ecclesiogenesis—the birth
of a new church. Instead of trying to find expedient measures and set up
bureaucratic structures to solve the crisis at hand, we can begin a process of
imagining a Communion that is truly global and multicultural, respecting
differences and staying in conversations even when it becomes difficult.
Many
Anglicans would like to see the birth of a new church focusing on the Missio
Dei (mission of God) and not on policing people’s sexuality. We would like
to see a church that welcomes the gifts and talents of all the baptized, and
not reinforcing a hierarchy. Let the conversations on the new shape of the
Anglican Church begin!
Kwok Pui Lan is the William F. Cole
Professor of Christian Theology and Spirituality at the Episcopal Divinity
School and her book Occupy Religion: Theology of the Multitude is forthcoming from Rowman and Littlefield.
