What should we make of the St Helen's Bishopsgate 'commissioning'?

The recent ‘commissioning service’ at St Helen’s Bishopsgate has attracted predictable criticism.

In that bastion of Church of England liberal thinking, the Church Times, Angela Tilby decried ‘the voice of the angry Puritanism that has been channelled down from the Reformation,’ before adding (oddly): ‘Today’s Puritans find it as hard as their ancestors to live with the creative ambiguity that, many would claim, is the lifeblood of the Church of England and defended by canon law.’ Er, come again? Many would argue that the ‘lifeblood of the Church of England’ is the 39 Articles with their insistence that ‘it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God’s Word written’ etc.

The response from official sources has also been predicably anaemic and feeble. Someone described vaguely (again in the Church Times) as ‘a spokesperson at Church House’ said: ‘We hold a variety of views on these questions, all of which are held with integrity and all of which deserve respect.’ So much, then, for bishops’ ordination vows to ‘refute error… and hand on entire the faith that is entrusted to you…’ Then again, many of them seem to have taken that with a pinch of salt for some time now.

The Diocese of London also issued a statement on 31st July which at least recognised that ‘some will feel the need for structural provision in the light of what has been passed by General Synod’ in relation to Living in Love and Faith. It then went on to speak of the London bishops representing ‘a breadth of traditions’ – a phrase generally used in the wider C of E as cover for often mutually-incompatible and self-contradictory theological convictions – before saying, in that wet version of Orwellian doublespeak which is the lingua franca of the Church of England, ‘we hope that everyone will work with the process to ensure a future in which all can flourish in the Church of England’. Ah yes, let truth and error flourish together… But we beg to differ. Once again, as so often in recent years, the famed saying of theologian Richard Neuhas (1936-2009) comes to mind: ‘Where orthodoxy is optional, orthodoxy will sooner or later be proscribed.’

There has also been criticism and questioning from some evangelicals too: It is too soon, too much, too out of synch with what everyone else is doing etc. Why this? And why like that? And what about x, y and z…? These thoughts are understandable – after all, people are allowed to have opinions and questions, and most certainly a variety of them at that; such is the nature of healthy and indeed legitimate human discussion. And evangelicals should not all be clones – there has been too much of that in the past! – so we do not all need to think the same about every single thing all the time. Questions are generally good.

Nonetheless, we would be wise to be careful before rushing to critique St Helen’s and those who took part in this service (including retired Bishops Rod Thomas and Julian Henderson, St Ebbe’s Rector Vaughan Roberts, and the Church of England Evangelical Council’s John Dunnett). Representatives of New Wine and Holy Trinity, Brompton are also believed to have attended. Here's why we should be slow to criticise: A helpful analogy has been drawn by the theologian Ian Paul. He compares C of E evangelicals to a flotilla of sailing boats, all moving ultimately in the same direction along a river, but, during that process, sailing into the wind – so that they appear to be criss-crossing with each other at various points while in fact all travelling towards the same ultimate destination. Or, to change the analogy, let us seek to avoid friendly fire which might damage the shared purpose of those contending within the C of E for truth when they are all under huge pressure emotionally, mentally and spiritually – for be in no doubt it is a spiritual battle.

Let us change the picture once again: ‘You cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs.’ Perhaps in the current situation it does indeed need a few of the more radical brethren to be prepared to go the extra mile in forcing the pace. Maybe, then, the Church of England’s bishops will finally – finally! – realise how serious the situation is, and how serious evangelicals are about the need for, the requirement of, and absolute imperative of genuine structural provision so that they can carry on with ministry independent of the sort of liberal wishy-washiness espoused by too many contributors to the Church Times (though sadly, that is a description they might well rejoice in and smile at, in that peculiarly Anglican middle-of-the-road way).

Let more eggs be broken!




An earlier version of this article has been updated as it misconnected criticisms from Angela Tilby of an earlier, related event with her later criticisms of this service. Some additional website links were also inserted for further background information.