A Glorious and Salutiferous Œconomy...?
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
A Glorious and Salutiferous Œconomy...? An ecclesiological enquiry into metropolitical authority and provincial polity in the Anglican Communion Alexander John Ross Emmanuel College A dissertation submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Divinity Faculty University of Cambridge April 2018 This dissertation is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. It is not substantially the same as any that I have submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for a degree or diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. I further state that no substantial part of my dissertation has already been submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for any such degree, diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. It does not exceed the prescribed word limit for the Faculty of Divinity Degree Committee. 2 Alexander John Ross A Glorious and Salutiferous Œconomy…? An ecclesiological enquiry into metropolitical authority and provincial polity in the Anglican Communion. Abstract For at least the past two decades, international Anglicanism has been gripped by a crisis of identity: what is to be the dynamic between autonomy and interdependence? Where is authority to be located? How might the local relate to the international? How are the variously diverse national churches to be held together ‘in communion’? These questions have prompted an explosion of interest in Anglican ecclesiology within both the church and academy, with particular emphasis exploring the nature of episcopacy, synodical government, liturgy and belief, and common principles of canon law. However, one aspect of Anglican ecclesiology which has received little attention is the place of provincial polity and metropolitical authority across the Communion. Yet, this is a critical area of concern for Anglican ecclesiology as it directly addresses questions of authority, interdependence and catholicity. However, since at least the twentieth century, provincial polity has largely been eclipsed by, and confused with, the emergence of a dominant ‘national church’ polity. This confusion has become so prevalent that the word ‘province’ itself is used interchangeably and imprecisely to mean both an ecclesial province in its strict sense and one of the 39 ‘member- churches’ which formally constitute the Anglican Communion, with a handful of ‘extra-provincial’ exceptions. The purpose of this research project is to untangle this confusion and to give a thorough account of the development of provincial polity and metropolitical authority within the Communion, tracing the historical origins of the contemporary status quo. The scope of this task is not in any way intended to be a comprehensive history of the emergence of international Anglicanism, but rather to narrowly chart the development of this particular unit of ecclesial polity, the province, through this broader narrative. The historical work of Part One in itself represents an important new contribution to Anglican Studies; however, the project aims to go further in Parts Two and Three to identify from this context key questions concerning the problems facing contemporary Anglican polity as the basis for further theological and ecclesiological reflection. Part Two examines how provincial polity has given way to an assumption of the ‘national church’ as the building block of the Communion. To what extent is it consonant with Anglican tradition? How is it problematic? What tensions exist with a more traditional understanding of the province? How might all this relate to wider political understandings and critiques of the ‘nation- state’ in an increasingly globalised world? Along with the emergence of a ‘national church’ ecclesiology, so too has the role of the ‘Primates’ been magnified. Part Three charts this development, culminating in a critique of the recent 2016 Primates’ Meeting. What is the nature of primacy within Anglicanism and how does it relate to metropolitical authority? What is the right balance of honour and authority as it relates to primacy? How do Anglican understandings of primacy correspond to those of the Roman and Orthodox Communions? Finally, Part Four attempts to give some concrete focus to the preceding discussion through the illustrative example of the Anglican Church of Australia, which is frequently cited as being analogous to the Communion in having a loose federal system and resolutely autonomous dioceses. The prevalence of this ‘diocesanism’ has recently been criticised by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. However, there has been a recent revival of provincial action within the Province of Victoria in response to these issues which will be evaluated to discern what the Australian example might offer toward a theologically robust and credible ecclesiology for Anglicanism into the twenty-first century. 3 4 – Acknowledgements – Without the patient and generous guidance and mentoring of my Principal Supervisor, Dr Rowan Williams, I am certain that this dissertation would not have progressed as it has, nor come near to reaching its conclusion. It has been a privilege to meet so regularly in his study and home at Magdalene College and to discuss the promise and problems of the Anglican Communion; albeit I suspect that at times it may have been as cathartic for him as it has been instructive for me! Many thanks also to those friends and colleagues who have shared in reading and commenting on my work as it has developed over the past two and a half years, and in my earlier exploration of the field while at Oxford, particularly Jeremy Morris, Stephen Plant, Jesse Zink, David Neaum and, at the ‘other place’, Martyn Percy and Mark Chapman. I have been extraordinarily fortunate to have been the recipient of a Commonwealth Scholarship, funded jointly by the UK Government and the Cambridge Trust, without which I would certainly have been unable to pursue this research at the University of Cambridge. I also thank the Cleaver Trust and the Archbishop of Melbourne for their generous financial and personal support. I must also acknowledge the generous provision of the C. S. Gray Fund at Emmanuel College which has supported my role as Assistant Chaplain in the College Chapel and allowed me to continue in practical and pastoral ministry while engaged in research. I thank the Master, Dean and Fellows of Emmanuel College for their generous welcome and engaging conversation at High Table, as well as the many friends I have made within the College, not least as a member of the Emmanuel boat Club, as I’ve sought to relax (and counter the inevitable consequence of too much dining) both on and off the river. Despite these collegial relationships and friendships, the work of writing and research has largely been solitary and necessarily self-driven. I thank the institutions and libraries which have afforded me space and inspiration to pursue my work: whether a dark and unexplored corridor within the University Library, the gracious reading room of the library at Emmanuel College, or (as is perhaps apposite alongside bishop Hensley Henson’s comment which heads the ‘Methodological Introduction’) the glorious South Library of the Athenaeum Club in London. I greatly benefitted from access to the archives of Lambeth Palace Library in the early stages of my research, and am particularly indebted to all the staff of the Anglican Communion Office at St Andrew’s House in London for their welcome during the year of my engagement with them and for the opportunity to thoroughly explore their archives, under the supervision and stewardship of Executive Officer and Information Manager, Stephanie Taylor. Finally, through the generous support of a Canon Denys Ruddy Memorial Scholarship, I have been able to spend a week in residence completing much of the final write up at Gladstone’s Library, formally St Deiniol’s, in Wales. I reserve my principal expression of gratitude for the steadfast and unswerving support and encouragement of my wife, Kirsty, even as she has so admirably balanced the pressures of her own fruitful ministry alongside the demands of motherhood. Thank you for being my constant champion, even (and especially) against my own doubts and uncertainties. To my two darling children, William and Isabella, both born during the period of this research: thank you for your delightful distractions, and my renewed appreciation for a good night’s sleep! 5 – Table of Contents – PREFACE ...................................................................................................................................................... D METHODOLOGICAL INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... NO Discerning the Anglican ‘Character’ ...................................................................................................................fg Does the Anglican Communion Even Exist? ...................................................................................................... fh Promoting an Appreciation of Polity within Anglican Studies ........................................................................... fi Ecclesial Polity as Applied Theology ................................................................................................................