Anglican/Episcopal News  |  Race & Ethnicity

Selective Biblical Literalism (Nothing New)
 By Daniel J. Webster
Wednesday, November 12, 2003
 


Daniel Webster is interviewed in front of Lambeth Palace on October 15, 2003, by a Russian television news reporter. Webster was in London to help international media understand the resolutions passed by the Episcopal Church's 2003 U.S. General Convention. [Photo by Ethan Flad]

One by one the walls have been torn down. Scholarly study and prayerful reflection over God's word have brought about significant changes in how we have responded to moral and ethical issues through the ages.

Jesus never spoke against slavery. He does say you should treat your slaves justly. Most people in our world today, certainly in our country, would say slavery is wrong. Yet a recent article in The New York Times estimated more than 27-million people live in some form of slavery around our globe.

Usury is strictly forbidden in the Hebrew scripture yet interest rates on loans and credit card debt are a way of life today. The list goes on.

The latest language from those who have stridently opposed the election, consent, and consecration of Gene Robinson to be a bishop of the church has been so strong, so passionate that one must ask of its origin. Is it the "historical biblical faith" that is so often quoted? Is it the tearing of "the fabric" of the Anglican Communion?

Defining Anglican orthodoxy is now setting about to separate 'in' or 'out' groups. Call it a schism or a heretical break among certain church, no matter; the result seems to be some sort of realignment in the Anglican world of churches.

Selective quotes from scripture used to prop up this practice or that, this doctrine or that. You know them -- slavery, usury, divorce, the denial of women to holy orders, and now homosexual behavior -- they have all been banned or allowed, citing certain biblical references.
The Anglican Communion has been fragmented for at least 30 years over the ordination of women. Now the ordination of a practicing homosexual to be a bishop has brought calls of 'repudiation,' 'rebuke,' 'rebuff,' 'apostate,' 'heretic,' the rhetoric staggers a writer's imagination.

The reality is we've been here before. A headline in a September 26, 1988 issue of The Times of London stated, "ANGLICANS FEAR SCHISM OVER WOMAN BISHOP, Divorcee heralds a 'hurricane of change'."

And what may have been the first instance to cause such a stir that drew the attention of bishops in the Anglican Communion was the "Colenso case." Bishop John Colenso served the diocese of Natal, South Africa. His 1862 paper, The Pentateuch and the Book of Joshua Critically Examined, caused an enormous stir.

Colenso was a mathematician before theological training. He challenged the math in the Hebrew scriptures. His work was so offensive to some he was deposed, removed as bishop and called home. He appealed to the Privy Council in London and won. Despite that he was excommunicated in 1866.

When the first gathering of Anglican bishops at Lambeth took place in 1867, the Colenso matter was high on the agenda. Challenging the literal word of the bible seemed just too much for Colenso's peers.

Missionaries from the Church of England were busy in the 19th century. They set about the British Empire, where the sun never set, to take the gospel to those over which they had dominion. Giles Fraser, vicar of Putney, outlines very nicely in a London newspaper article last month how the evangelicals and liberals divided up the mission territory to spread their individual understandings of the gospel.

Four African and Asian brothers and sisters in Christ. In many of those churches women are not ordained, power is centralized in the ordained male leadership, polygamy is allowed in some areas and democracy is a foreign concept. The system is set up to exclude.
"The CofE (Church of England) also exported its own homegrown divisions," writes Fraser. "Evangelical and high church missionaries carved up the empire, creating Anglican provinces of hugely different theological temperaments."

The seeds sewn by the biblical literalists now have grown into rigid, rugged trees prepared to withstand any wind of change or maturing or deepening theological growth.

"Few Anglicans can be called biblical literalists," writes Frederick Quinn in his book, To Be a Pilgrim (Crossroad, 2001). That may be true in the churches of much of the developed world but not so, apparently, in the many of youngest churches of the Communion.

At the early October meeting of the American Anglican Council in Dallas, speakers held up as some sort of orthodox icon "the dynamic global south." This reference to churches of the southern hemisphere seemed to indicate the rest of the Anglican Communion should follow the faithful example of our African and Asian brothers and sisters in Christ.

In many of those churches women are not ordained, power is centralized in the ordained male leadership, polygamy is allowed in some areas and democracy is a foreign concept. The system is set up to exclude.

The Episcopal Church (USA) has had a democratic process for than two centuries. Leadership is now open to men and women, lay and clergy. And everyone, from bishop to rector to parish vestry member, is elected.

Right now the three-legged stool of Richard Hooker -- scripture, tradition, reason -- seems lopsided. Reason is the short side to what feels like an overwhelming emphasis on literal tradition and scripture.
Since 1785 the General Convention of ECUSA has charted the course of this church as it has discerned living out the gospel in successive generations. Elected deputies, both lay and clergy, meet to prayerfully consider the matters placed before them. The 2003 Convention affirmed the church's commitment to anti-racism work, elected new members to its Executive Council and consented to the elections of ten diocesan bishops including Gene Robinson.

"This House does not do the work of the world," the Very Rev. George Werner, president of the House of Deputies reminded those who had gathered to hear the vote on the Robinson consent. Before and after the tally from all the diocesan deputations was read the chaplain led a prayer. It included as much as a minute and a half of silence. For some it was truly a holy moment. The Holy Spirit was believed by many to be at work there.

General Convention is the governing authority of the ECUSA not its elected presiding bishop. The Anglican expression of the Christian church in the USA may not be too liberal for the rest of the Communion. It may just be too democratic.

The Anglican Communion finds itself in the midst of great growing pains. The pain was evident in Minneapolis at General Convention, at the Dallas AAC meeting, and at the Lambeth meeting of Primates from Oct. 15-16. Right now the three-legged stool of Richard Hooker -- scripture, tradition, reason -- seems lopsided. Reason is the short side to what feels like an overwhelming emphasis on literal tradition and scripture.

Traditions change and adapt. Scripture can be studied in light of new theology or interpretations. Witness the Dead Sea scrolls and Nag Hammadi library.

We have a painful history. Why should it be any different now? The question may come down to whether we are growing up or growing apart.


The Rev. Daniel J. Webster is director of communications for the Episcopal Diocese of Utah. A media veteran and peace activist in the church, he writes a regular online column for The Witness. He can be reached at dwebster@episcopal-ut.org.