The Question of Our Day

“What is a human being? That is the most important question of our day. If we do not answer that question then our neighbours cannot access the Gospel.

Ignorance of human nature prevents people from understanding the good ends for which we are created, and therefore from understanding actions and habits that destroy those ends, and therefore from understanding sin, and therefore from understanding the Gospel. …

… I pray that my feeble words will help you to understand a small measure of the depths and power of the darkness around us, and that the way out is to run toward the darkest place, the ground where the enemy is even now digging his trenches.”

– In a confronting post at the American Anglican Council, Adam J. MacLeod, Professor of Law at Faulkner University in Alabama, outlines the difficult circumstances in which we must proclaim Christ.

It’s also a reminder that, without Christ, we can do nothing. (John 15:5)

Evangelicals and the end of Christendom

From The Pastor’s heart:

“What happened to the idea of Christian Australia – so long and widely held and so quickly abandoned? …

We are diving back to the middle of last century today and thinking about how different leaders of the evangelical faith navigated the end of Christendom with historian Hugh Chilton from Scots College, Sydney.”

– Watch or listen here.

Anglican Priests — Ontological? Functional? Or something else?

Joshua Bovis at St John’s Tamworth shares this article written for his parish newsletter –

Anglican Priests — Ontological? Functional? Or something else?

The 1st of May is the anniversary of my ordination to the Priesthood.

When I used to have a Facebook account I placed a picture of the occasion on my news feed (yes that is me, the man in white just right of the middle). One of the others in the photo also placed the same pic on his Facebook page. What I found interesting was that he received many comments and ‘likes’ whereas I received no comments and not many likes.

Of course it is Facebook, it does not really mean anything because the world of Facebook is not real, but what is real is that my friend who was priested with me held to an ontological view of ordination. Whereas my view of ordination is functional (though I suspect he agreed with some aspects of the functional view).

For those who are not sure what I am writing about, here is an explanation:

Ordination – The Ontological View

When a person is ordained, there is a change regarding their very nature. In essence you become a different kind of person, a different king of Christian, and this is not to do primarily with your role, (though it shapes and dictates your role) but with who and what you become. God effects an ontological change in the very nature of who you are. Deacons, Priests and Bishops who hold to this view see themselves as being in Holy Orders until they die, still recognised as one by retaining their title even at retirement and still wear their clerical garb. The Roman Catholic Church holds to this view. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) states that ordination “confers an indelible spiritual character” which “cannot be “repeated or conferred temporarily” (CCC#1583). “The vocation and mission received on the day of his ordination mark him permanently” (CCC#1583).

The late Rev John Richardson (aka The Ugley Vicar) describes this view like this:

“In ordination, the person being ordained is, as it were, ‘made into’ a priest — he (or she) is no longer quite what they were as a layperson, and is not simply ‘authorised’ by ordination, but is changed and ‘empowered’ by it.”

The views on this ‘empowerment’ may vary, but the essential characteristic is that priest and laity are in some way separated in what they are, not just in what they do. We will call this simply the ‘priestly’ model, since for most people, the word ‘priest’ conjures up exactly this ‘set apart specialness’ of someone different from the layperson.

Ordination – The Functional View

When a person is ordained, nothing happens to them in regards to their nature. The change is only in regards to what they can do publicly. Actually what presbyter/priests do in church, anyone Christian can do in their own homes.

And as for the prayer in the Anglican ordinal asking God to send down The Holy Spirit, is so that the Newly ordained priest may do what the ordinal and the Scriptures set out for them and require them to do, Scripture is very clear what the role of the ordained is to be. The Pastoral Epistles (1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus) are very clear on what the role is of a Presbyter/Priest, and the Anglican Ordinal very clearly states what the roles, requirements and expectations are of a Deacon, Priest or Bishop and the roles are functional.

So while I do not hold to the ontological view of the Priesthood (due it its origins lying in Roman Catholic Theology rather than the Scriptures, nor is it supported by the Anglican Ordinal), I do wonder if the understanding of the Functional view of ordination is deficient in some way for it seems to me that there are two weaknesses with the current understanding of the Functional view:

First weakness – The role of the ordained is professionalised – Where they are likened to that of a CEO, service leader, preacher, Bible study teacher, manager of other clergy (who are called paid staff). In other words the role seems to be reduced to that of someone who is a paid professional, rather than a role that is vocational and one of calling.  So one’s suitability as a priest and effectiveness as a priest is discerned by ‘success’ (however ‘success’ is defined in modern 21st ministry culture) and in practice one’s godliness, holiness, piety, love for others is minimalised or reduced.

Second weakness – The role of the ordained is compartmentalised – It allows for the vows ordinands make at their ordination to be compartmentalised from every day life and their roles to be compartmentalised from everyday life when the reality is that neither is possible.

Whether a deacon, priest of bishop likes it or not, (although there is no ontological change within them at the ordination), the way they are perceived by people will change. Whether those views held are right or wrong; based on weird theology or something they have imbibed from childhood or previous experience; whether they are Christians in their own church, or unbelievers without their church; it cannot be avoided, even when they are not in church, even when it is their day off, and even if they are out and about not wearing a clerical collar attempting to be anonymous. Once a person is ordained, it does not go away, and there is no off switch. Of course they can take a day off from ministry, (and they should) but they cannot take a day off from the vows that they made at their ordinations, nor decide to reject the very doctrines that they affirmed at their ordinations; just as they cannot take a day off from being a Christian and they cannot take the day off from how people will see them.

Personal Example when I was serving as an Assistant Minister in my previous parish, I was at the shopping centre buying a DVD, I was not wearing a clergy collar and the girl served me remembered me from her Mother’s funeral I conducted. In her eyes, I was the priest. At the moment I was not leading a service, nor reading the Bible, nor preaching, nor was I managing church staff, so according to the functional view I was not acting as a priest. But in her eyes I was, simply by being.

This was supported by something I read which stated:

“There are appropriate whole-of-life expectations for ministers such that they cannot ever switch off from their role in the same way that a pilot can when they’re not flying. And even once they’ve retired from a position, a failure to live up to their ordination vows can have significant impact on those that the clergy have previously ministered to in a way that a pilot’s post-flight behaviour doesn’t affect their previous passengers”.

I viewed an online piece some years ago pertaining to the UK series entitled Rev and the author noted the confusion between being a priest and leading the church; the ontological view of being a priest and the functional view of being a priest. The author looks at it from the problem of the ontological view (i.e. Just because someone is called to be a priest, doesn’t mean they’re called to lead a church). We see this with the Rev’s main protagonist Rev Adam Smallbone. In short Smallbone is absolutely not suited to being a Priest. But because his role is defined by the Ontological view, therein lies the problem. The author points this out in his piece and I think is absolutely correct when he says:

The result is people like Adam Smallbone in Rev. He’s a nice guy; he’s clearly got some kind of call on his life. But according to that list, he isn’t called to lead a church, and the tension in the series comes from fact that no-one quite grasps that he may well be called to be a priest by the C of E’s understanding (Ontological), but he isn’t called to lead a church by the Bible’s understanding (Functional).

We see the problems shining through in the series. Adam isn’t a good preacher; as a result his congregation don’t have transforming encounters with God’s word and so don’t change. We see that painfully clearly when it comes to welcoming a repentant paedophile into the church. Adam understands grace, but he hasn’t communicated that understanding to the rest of the church, so they reject him. Adam’s wife isn’t properly on board with him being a vicar – she clearly resents it and it causes all kinds of problems for her faith, and for his leadership. I know both from personal experience and from that of friends that if a vicar’s spouse isn’t keen on them following the calling to lead a church, it won’t work. The tragedy is that Adam has been badly let down by the C of E in its confusion between the calling to be a priest and the calling to lead a church. As a result, everyone loses – Adam, the local church, and the wider church”.

This is the weakness of the ontological view, but the weakness of the current understanding of the functional view is just a serious. A priest who is professionalised and is compartmentalised and sees their role as a priest as a job rather than a calling and a vocation is just as unhelpful as the Rev Adam Smallbone.

So back to my FB pic. I suspect that the reason why my post did not receive so many comments from many of my ‘friends’ is because they hold to the functional view of ordination, they don’t view being priested as being that much of a big deal. Another author expresses this point using the analogy of acquiring a pilot’s licence:

“Being ordained is a bit like getting your pilot’s licence. You need one to fly but it’s no more than a mark of recognition that you’ve proven yourself able to fly, that you choose to be an active pilot and that the authorities are happy to accept you. There’s no way in the world that just issuing a licence gives you your flying skills and there’s no reason to hold a licence once your active flying career is over”.

If this is the understanding of the functional view of ordination then I think it goes too far, however the answer I believe is not for Anglicans (ordained or non-ordained) to embrace the ontological view of ordination, but to re-examine the functional view of ordination in light of God’s Word and to a lesser extent (though not insignificant) the Ordinal. Scripture is clear that all Christians are members of a new Royal Priesthood, however those whom God has called to be ordained, like every Christian, are to be living examples of those who worship God in Spirit and in truth who offer their bodies to God as living sacrifices (Romans 12:1). This means that the oaths clergy made at their ordinations, the doctrines that they affirmed and the promises that they made are to be lived out transparently (and by God’s grace, contagiously) every day, and it does not matter if they are not rostered down to lead or preach that Sunday or whether they have parish council coming up that week.

Not ontological, but more than merely functional.

– Joshua Bovis is the Vicar of St John The Evangelist in Tamworth.

Do the Archbishops know that Leicester Diocese is About to Close 234 Parishes?

“This Saturday, 9 October, Leicester Diocesan Synod is expected to vote on a scheme to replace Leicester’s 234 parishes with 20-25 ‘Minsters’, each with at least four leaders. This would reduce Leicester Diocese’s stipendiary clergy posts from 100 to 80 by 2026.

The scheme’s proposal document suggests that paid positions would mostly go to stipendiary clergy, ‘but our aspiration is for increased lay ministry’. Each Minster would have a new Operations Director, introducing another layer to Leicester’s diocesan bureaucracy (recently estimated at 179). …”

– Emma Thompson writes at English Churchman about plans to change the structure of one Church of England diocese. Other are looking at similar changes.

(Link via Anglican Mainstream.)

Four Reasons Pastors Should Consider Quitting Social Media

“Pastors should be especially aware of how the digital age is changing our parishioners and ourselves.

There are benefits to having at our fingertips encyclopedic information, news updates, and virtual access to others.

There are dangers, too. I believe the downsides of social media and overabundant digital information outweigh the benefits.

Here are four reasons I limit my time on the internet and don’t use social media at all…”

– Sam Ferguson, Rector of The Falls Church Anglican in Virginia, has some thoughts about pastors and social media. At The Gospel Coalition. (Link via Tim Challies.)

Related:

The Clear and Present Danger of Social Media Out of Control – Albert Mohler.

With a Conversion Therapy ban on the Table, the Threat of Jail for Christians is real

“At a time in the not so distant past (about 10 years ago), the phrase “gay evangelical demands that prayer for conversion be criminalised” would make as much sense as “square circle makes triangle”. But in today’s world it seems about par for the course!

I’m not sure that in many years of reading ‘reports’ I have ever read one as chilling, or with such dangerous implications, as the just released Cooper Report from the Ozanne Foundation. That may sound hyperbolic but bear with me as we see what the report actually says.

Although I was aware of the stance Jayne Ozanne was taking and the dangers of a ban on ‘conversion therapy’ being used as a ban on conversion, I was still shocked to read the proposals in the Cooper Report. …”

– David Robertson at The Wee Flea writes about disturbing proposals in the UK.

Don’t assume it couldn’t happen here.

Why we should all be using printed Bibles

“When you open a print Bible, you are immediately aware of where the text you are reading comes in the Bible as a whole. Genesis is at the beginning; the Psalms are in the middle. Revelation is at the end. Noticing these, even unconsciously, is contributing to your biblical literacy—your overall understanding of the shape of the biblical story—and this is a crucial skill in reading and interpreting well. …”

– Ian Paul loves his electronic Bibles, but wants to encourage you to use a printed Bible. His arguments make a great deal of sense.

Archbishop Raffel on Sunrise 13 September 2021

Archbishop Kanishka Raffel was interviewed on Seven’s Sunrise this morning, 13 September 2021.

The interview highlights the desire to minister to all while acting responsibly during the COVID outbreak.

A Profile of Moral Collapse: President Biden, Abortion, and the Culture of Death

“Almost fifty years after Roe v. Wade, abortion remains the moral issue in American public discourse and politics.

There are very few profiles in courage in American politics. This seems especially true when it comes to the defense of unborn life. The political predicament of a pro-life politician is this – the political class and the New York-Hollywood-Silicon Valley axis reward those who abandon pro-life positions and condemn those who refuse to surrender.

A particularly important profile in moral collapse now resides in the White House. The story of President Joe Biden’s slippery shape-shifting on the abortion issue is both revealing and horrifying.

Brace yourself. …”

– In his latest essay, Albert Mohler looks at what happens when leaders abandon their ‘devoutly held beliefs’ for political expediency. This is not a ‘party political’ commentary, but a chronicling of one man’s moral shift, at the expense of countless unborn lives. Mohler ends with a challenge to us all.

Why We Can’t Sign the Ezekiel Declaration — an Evangelical Response

“Over the past week a letter has been promoted and circulated around many churches and religious organisations. The Ezekiel Declaration (“the Declaration”) is addressed to Prime Minister Scott Morrison and outlines concerns over a potential “vaccine passport” that would be required for church attendance.

The letter has now received 2000+ signatures of religious leaders from across Australia, and for that reason alone it is gaining much attention receiving quite a splash. For every signatory there are certainly many more Christian leaders who have not signed their names. Still, 2000+ names and the organisations that they represent is a significant number. …”

– David Ould and Murray Campbell have jointly published their thoughts on “the Ezekiel Declaration”.

See what you think of their reasoning, and continue to pray for all those in authority.

Update (02 September 2021) –

A response to The Ezekiel Declaration – Gospel, Society and Culture Committee of the Presbyterian Church in Australia in NSW and the ACT.

After the betrayal of democracy in Afghanistan, will other countries in the region ever trust the West again?

“I was born and brought up in neighbouring Pakistan and ministered up and down the land during the first civil war in Afghanistan, when five million Afghans took refuge in Pakistan. I was involved in the Church’s efforts to relieve their sufferings and to provide educational and medical facilities for them.

As Bishop of Raiwind, though, I warned both Pakistan and the West that the arming and training of extremist groups, from within Pakistan and Afghanistan and from the wider world, to fight the Soviet presence in Afghanistan would lead to the emergence of groups like the Taliban and would internationalise extremist Islamism. …”

– Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali published this opinion piece last weekend.

Related:

The dangers facing Afghan Christians inside their country and escaping from it – Barnabas Fund.

Archbishop Kanishka Raffel on TEN’s The Project

Archbishop Kanishka Raffel was a guest on Network TEN’s The Project this evening, speaking about refugees from Afghanistan.

Watch here (Twitter).

Related:

Christian leaders urge Morrison to take more Afghan refugees – Sydney Morning Herald, 22 August 2021.

Pet carers can leave lockdown to do their job, but not a priest to tend his flock

“I’m not the only person struggling through this pandemic. I’m also not the only person feeling anxious. But as a devout Maronite Catholic, I can’t help but notice that people of faith aren’t getting the spiritual support they need to get through this. And no, I’m not talking about packing churches with large congregations. …”

– Ann-Marie Boumerhe, lawyer and director of Maronites on Mission, writes this opinion piece in The Sydney Morning Herald.

The Swanson diocese

In October 2019, Joshua Bovis, Vicar of St John The Evangelist in Tamworth, wrote this opinion-piece for the Anglican Ink website.

It’s particularly relevant in the light of yesterday’s pastoral letter from the Bishop of Newcastle to clergy in that diocese.

Joshua shares something of his own experiences of the Newcastle Diocese from 2009 to 2013, the time during which he was a postulant, ordinand, deacon, and priest:

“At their recent Synod this weekend, the Anglican Diocese of Newcastle passed two bills to enable clergy to bless what God in His Word deems to be sinful, to bless what the Bible says is an expression of an anti-God state of mind (see Romans 1:18ff), to declare holy what God states keeps people out of the Kingdom of God, and redefined the doctrine of marriage. This move mirrors that of a similar proposal passed by Wangaratta diocese in Victoria. …

I am very saddened by this. For it was was in the Newcastle Diocese that I was ordained to the diaconate and to the priesthood. It was a very moving experience. (I am the man in the chasuble that is is almost all white).

It was very powerful hearing the exhortation to both in my public and private ministry oppose and set aside teaching that is contrary to God’s Word, to be told to encourage and build up the body of Christ, to preach the Word of God, lead God’s people in prayer, declare God’s forgiveness and blessing. Also the reminder to pastor after the pattern of Christ the great Shepherd, to lead the people of God as a servant of Christ; to love and serve the people with whom you work, caring alike for young and old, rich and poor, weak and strong; to studying the Scriptures wholeheartedly, reflecting with God’s people upon their meaning, so that my ministry and life may be shaped by Christ.

I was reminded of how great a treasure has been placed in my care and that I will be called to give an account before Jesus Christ.

It was in the Newcastle Diocese that I openly declared my conviction that the Holy Scriptures contains all doctrine necessary for eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, and declared by God’s grace determination and intention and desire to instruct from these Scriptures the people committed to my care, teaching nothing as essential to salvation which cannot be demonstrated from the Scriptures. …”

– Read it all at Anglican Ink, and do note the questions asked. How might you answer if they were asked of you?

(As Albert Mohler has warned many times, “Every Christian and every Christian ministry will come to a reckoning – we must all decide here and now where we stand. Will we pivot or will we hold fast to faithfulness and the hope of the gospel?”)

Photos: Joshua Bovis.

Australian and English evangelicals show different approaches to Anglican institutional revisionism

“On the same day (19th July) that Gafcon Australia publicly unveiled their plans to establish an alternative Anglican jurisdiction in response to the trajectory of revisionism in the Church of Australia, the Church of England Evangelical Council issued a statement about the Bishop of Liverpool’s address to the MOSAIC campaign group, in which he called for same sex marriage in the Church of England. The difference in the two statements is symptomatic of more general differences between the way that orthodox Anglicans are engaging with the national church in both countries.

The CEEC statement begins with an appreciation of Bishop Bayes’ subsequent apology for his attack on those who believe the historic teaching of the church on sex and marriage …”

– At Anglican Mainstream, Andrew Symes makes some very interesting comparisons. He has a strong challenge to his UK readership.

Andrew’s sentiments would probably have been shared by the late John Richardson. Twenty-eight years ago, the ACL’s newsletter published his article “UK Evangelicalism: Optimistic?“. John consistently argued that evangelicals in the Church of England need to fight for the faith once for all delivered to the saints, rather than act like gentlemen playing cricket.

And, for good measure, here’s a brief clip of John speaking about the significance of his 1993 year at Moore College.

Image of Andrew Symes: Christian Concern.

← Previous Page — Next Page →