The Anglican Communion is taking desperate measures to stitch together something that might be passed off as a silk purse rather than the sow’s ear it has become. When the General Synod meets later this month to discuss the proposed Anglican Covenant, designed to hold together its disparate members with their “constitutional autonomy [in] the Anglican Communion”, they will find that lines have already have been drawn and campaigns organised against it.
As the major churches of East and West strive for unity with signs of [gender neutral] brotherly love, the Anglican Communion persists in pushing itself further and further away pretending that God is for their liberal agenda, necessitating rules for dealing with strife. Gone is the mystery, the tolerance, the ‘love thy neighbour’ of the New Covenant which swept away the hypocrisy of old. In its place we have a secularised, do as you please organisation where faith has given way to political correctness, often self-centred rather than Christ-centred.
An example of how badly things have gone wrong is demonstrated by the Episcopal Church of the United States illustrated in the Anglican Curmudgeon Blog and, closer to the context of the Church of England, by the St Barnabas Blog.
Seeing how Anglicanism is falling apart clearly shows that re-interpreting the Gospel to suit today's lifestyle does not work. This is exemplified by the web site of the CofE's neighbouring Church in Wales, the introductory page of which has much more to do with politics than with religion. “His Darkness” the Archbishop of Wales, a disciple of Mrs Jefferts Schori, frequently claims that he is making the church relevant to society today, blind to the fact that the unchanging mysteries of Orthodoxy and Catholicism have far more relevance outside his little domain. Even unchanging Islam growing in their own backyards fails to convince liberals that they may be mistaken.
Compare these examples of modern day Anglicanism with the timeless teachings of the Orthodox and Catholic churches. Compare traditional faith with the modern difficulties caused of choosing another way. I do not ever remember the Archbishop of Canterbury looking so uncomfortable as he does when he seeks to explain the Anglican Covenant. And with good reason as its main purpose is stated to be how to sort out divisions that have arisen [of their own making Ed]. Archbishop Rowan ends by saying that he hopes the covenant will be a “truly effective tool for witness and mission in our world”.
I wish him success in his endeavour but it must be blindingly obvious that if the Anglican Church had continued to follow the New Covenant in Jesus Christ, there should be no need of another.
