The Formularies

Certainly the historic Anglican Way is committed to the threefold Ministry
as being the will of God and the basis of sound order and polity for the
Church of God. Yet a careful perusal of its Formularies [BCP, Ordinal &
Articles of Religion] reveals that the loyalty due to bishops, priests and
deacons who publicly teach error and heresy is very limited.

The Prayer for the Church in the Order for Holy Communion of the BCP has
this petition:

“…to inspire continually the universal Church with the spirit of truth,
unity and concord: And grant that all they that do confess thy holy Name may
agree in the truth of thy holy Word and live in unity, and godly
love….[thus] Give grace…to all Bishops and Curates that they may both by
their life and doctrine set forth thy true and lively Word.”

This leaves us in no doubt as to what is expected of Bishops and clergy.

Then also, in the Ordinal four of the eight Questions asked of the person
to be made Bishop by the Archbishop or Presiding Bishop pertain to his
maintaining wholesome and sound doctrine. Further, the candidate actually
promises to banish and drive away all erroneous and strange doctrine,
contrary to God’s Word.

This heavy and central emphasis upon the vocation of teaching sound and
wholesome doctrine is also found in the Articles of Religion.

“Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation; so that
whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be
required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith,
or be thought requisite or necessary for salvation.” [Article VI]

Thus the comprehensiveness which has become a hallmark of the Anglican Way
is based on the foundation that nothing should be taught or done which is
contrary to the Word of God, and also that nothing be required as a
necessary belief which cannot be proved from Holy Scripture. At the same
time, however, “Traditions and Ceremonies” imposed by the local, national
Church, should be received and obeyed by all clergy and people as long as
they do not conflict with the clear teaching of Scripture. For anything
that is imposed that is repugnant to Holy Scripture is not to be obeyed.

There will be occasions when the laity and maybe clergy of necessity have to
receive the ministry of a bishop or priest who is in error and receive the
sacrament from his hand. In this case, according to Article XXVI, they are
not to allow his failure to stand in the way of his being, even in his
sinfulness, a minister of God to them. But the fact that an unworthy and
erring minister can be a vehicle of the grace of God in no way justifies his
error and sin, and it is the duty of those in authority to investigate and
if necessary to depose him.

Conclusion

So it would appear that what we are hearing from the Archbishop of
Canterbury and lesser mortals is a revisionist view of the nature of the
episcopate and the duties of bishops. The Anglican Communion of Churches is
not merely united through the College of Bishops but also through unity in
sound doctrine. Collegiality of bishops without a unity in truth is worth
little --, indeed it may be extremely injurious to the Church of God.

It is worth recalling that on the title page of “The Articles agreed upon
by the archbishops and bishops…” printed in the BCP (1662) we read that
their purpose is “the avoiding of diversities of opinions and for the
establishing of consent touching true religion.” Here church unity is
established doctrinally not institutionally. And such also is the message
of The Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal.

We do not necessarily endorse the way in which the AMiA has come into being
but in the providence of God it is now on the scene and it has provoked
reactions and these reactions have revealed a very unsatisfactory side to
modern Anglicanism.

We want to suggest that the reaction from the Archbishop of Canterbury is
not a healthy one and, worse still, it does not appear to be in accord with
the doctrine concerning bishops within Scripture or the historic
Formularies. He has apparently adopted a revisionist view of both
Anglicanism and bishops, making the latter, whatever their known views, to
be the center of unity, come what way. Thus he appears to favor an
institutional unity around the established, sitting episcopate and not, as
do the Holy Scriptures and the Formularies, a dynamic unity based upon
Truth with Bishops upholding that same truth in the Church of God.

Apostolic succession is not only a succession of persons but it is first of
all a succession of apostolic doctrine. We need godly and learned
archbishops and bishops who maintain and teach wholesome doctrine and who
drive away all teaching from the church that is repugnant to the Word of
God.

(for a similar essay see “Carey on Denver” in New Directions, London, August
2001, by John Richardson.)

The Rev’d Dr. Peter Toon, August 3rd 2001.