Irreconcilable Differences

From The Living Church:

11/26/2006

By Jack Estes

I have heard it said that the United States and England are two nations separated by a common language. For even though both share a common heritage from the past, today the words and the meanings are set in the context of different cultures, different histories, and a matrix of knowing and perceiving the world that is peculiar to each country. The language sounds the same, but much of what is said means something different.

The same holds true for liberal Episcopalians and conservative Anglicans. We are two churches separated by a common language. Although we share a common heritage, the priorities and practice of our faith are set in the context of different theologies, different views of the surrounding culture, and a matrix of knowing and perceiving God and the world that is peculiar to each.

Much of what is said in conversation with each other sounds the same, but the meanings are substantially different. Each community may be able to hear the words of the other, but in the end both walk away perplexed, not understanding what the other really meant. Perplexion turns to confusion, confusion to frustration, frustration to anger. We get angry because the others just don’t seem to get it. We seem to say the same thing, but then act in ways that are radically different.

The problem begins as soon as we try to name the difference. Most liberal Episcopalians consider themselves to be Anglicans. Many conservative Anglicans continue to assert that they are Episcopalians. We can’t even seem to make a distinction on what to call ourselves. For the sake of clarity, this essay shall refer to those who are committed to the progressive view held by a majority in The Episcopal Church (TEC) as liberal Episcopalians. Those who are committed to the traditional view, along with most of those in the Global South, shall be referred to as conservative Anglicans.

Naturally, the situation is not as simple as this. A whole spectrum exists in between the extreme left and the extreme right. Individuals, parishes, and dioceses consist of different mixes and opinions. This post-modern tendency to customize our own religious beliefs adds to the complexity and the confusion. Nevertheless, in the final analysis there remain two distinct theological systems, or religious expressions, which are distinct and irreconcilable.

At present they remain conjoined, two churches separated by a common language, the language of Anglican Christianity. Both uphold the Book of Common Prayer as the standard of worship. Both ascribe to tradition, reason, and scripture as the Anglican way. Both claim to be legitimate heirs of the Anglican tradition. Indeed, both may be justified in doing so, as the Anglican stream has provided a place of nurture for each.

Each theological expression asserts to uphold the truth of the gospel. Both affirm the authority of holy scripture. Both hold up Jesus Christ as Savior. Both even maintain that they are orthodox. Like the surface of a lake on a still afternoon, each reflects the surrounding landscape of Anglicanism in an illusion of unity. But beneath the surface there is a great divide.

In order to plunge into the depths and see clearly the division that resides there, one must ask questions that break through the surface mirage, questions that are penetrating. For example, we may ask, “Is Jesus Christ the Savior?” Most will answer “Yes.” But if we ask, “Who is Jesus?” “What do we mean by the Christ?” or, “What is the nature of sin and salvation?,” very different answers will begin to emerge. These answers form the theological presuppositions, which in turn order the faith and practice of each respective church community.

Who is Jesus? What is the gospel? How does holy scripture have authority? What is sin? Morality? Is God independent from the universe, or interdependent with it? These questions penetrate the idyllic surface of statements to which all claim to adhere. Beneath the surface we are faced with answers from two separate and distinct theological systems. These systems may be cohesive in and of themselves, but are radically different from one another.

Once the surface is broken, like a scuba diver we begin to see clearly what lies beneath. Two distinct visions of what it means to be an Anglican, perhaps even what it means to be a Christian, have emerged, and there is a great divide between them. This divide will not be breached by simply talking it over in the common language of the surface. Such conversation is merely representative. It does not convey the meanings that reside in the depth. The only way this division can be overcome would be if one or the other abandons their theological presuppositions.

Will this happen? Will liberal Episcopalians abandon their commitment to promoting gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgender inclusiveness, a peace and justice gospel, and the acceptance of all faiths as equivalent paths to God? Will conservative Anglicans abandon their commitment to morality based on an objective scriptural standard, Jesus as the exclusive means of salvation, and a gospel that proclaims the need to convert others to Christianity?

Simply answered, No!

Neither liberal Episcopalians nor conservative Anglicans will abandon the foundations of their faith as they see it. Whole lives and whole communities of faith are formed and committed to these two increasingly distinct and separate systems of belief. For either of them to cast aside these foundations would be to abandon their understanding of God, and, along with it, the community that is formed around that understanding.

And so we will remain divided, two churches — two theologies, separated by a common language. The division will only become greater as time goes on. Unless we honestly acknowledge the divide and embrace a realistic solution, lack of understanding, frustration, and anger will continue to escalate.

The only way to resolve the conflict is through reformation. In order to maintain integrity and fulfill their respective visions, liberals and conservatives must each reform into their own distinctive communities of faith. Attempting to force one side to capitulate to the other will only result in the shredding of all.

The great divide in the Anglican stream of Christianity is upon us. The division, which is already a reality beneath the surface, is becoming visible and tangible to all. Common language does not make the English into Americans nor Americans into English. Neither will it make liberal Episcopalians into conservative Anglicans, nor conservative Anglicans into liberal Episcopalians.

The time for denial is over. The day is at hand when all must choose to stand on one side of the divide or the other. Reformation is already underway. The only question remaining is how will it be accomplished? Will we reform with civility and respect for one another, or with bloody conflict and court battles?

The Rev. Jack Estes is the rector of St. Luke’s Church, Bakersfield, Calif.

This Reader’s Viewpoint article, which appears in the print edition, does not necessarily represent the editorial opinion of The Living Church or its board of directors.

To find more news, feature articles, and commentary about the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion not available online, we invite you to subscribe to The Living Church magazine.