July 4, 2004

Pentecost 5

Sermon: Independence, Dependence, and Interdependence

(Protestant, Roman Catholic, Anglican)

Freedom has boundaries. To some people today that makes no sense. They seem to think that freedom is a guarantee that you can do absolutely anything you want with no regard for God or anyone around you. But that is not at all what freedom means. Freedom is always conditional. There is no such thing as absolute freedom because God did not make His creation with any such idea in mind. Exercising freedom within the boundaries God has set is how we experience love.

When God made Adam and Eve, He gave them freedom. He said that the whole earth was theirs to enjoy, to develop, to explore. But there was one place that was out of bounds, one tree that they should stay away from. The “tree of the knowledge of good and evil.”

Let me use a political analogy that may be helpful. As Americans we enjoy certain freedoms, we have certain “inalienable rights”. We have freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom to dissent from the government, freedom to own private property. Those freedoms are guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. The U.S. Constitution gives its blessing and protection to those rights. But those freedoms only apply to us within the geographic borders of the United States. If you go outside those borders, beware.

For example, did you know that if you travel to Saudi Arabia you do not have freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, or freedom of worship. If the Saudi police find you gathering with other Christians to pray and worship and study the Bible, you will be arrested, and there is very little that anyone in this country can do to help you.

If you travel to China, you do not have the right to dissent, to speak openly against the government. Remember Tiennaman Square? Freedom has boundaries, something we Americans tend to forget, and something that the church is also in danger of forgetting.

In light of the present controversy in our church, it strikes me that many of you don’t seem to know what all this talk about the Anglican Communion is about. Perhaps I have failed you in some way. I have made it my first duty to try always to communicate the Gospel, what it means to be a Christian. I do still believe that is the most important message of the church. But there is another question that begs an answer. What does it mean to be an Anglican?

When I hear a fellow priest in this Diocese say, “We fought a war to separate from England 200 years ago. It’s time to finish the job,” I wonder what being Anglican means to him, or to any of us. Unfortunately, it appears that the word Anglican has little or no meaning to most Episcopalians in America today, and that is a shame.

We fought the American Revolution to separate politically from the domination of the British Empire, but we did not separate ourselves from the rest of the church. After the revolution was over the first business of the Episcopal Church in America was to re-attach itself to the Church of England and the worldwide fellowship of the Anglican Communion. The first and most urgent need was the ordaining of Bishops for the church in America.

It is important to note that the leaders of our church then did not presume to take this matter upon themselves, assuming that as a result of the Revolution, they were then free to set up bishops in any manner they saw fit without consultation from the rest of the Church.

Because the relationship with England was still tense, it was first through the church in Scotland that Bishop Samuel Seabury was consecrated a bishop for the church in America. Later, as the relationship between the Church of England and the church in America continued to be defined, other bishops were consecrated to serve in America, and the American church was finally able to function again at all levels, but still owing it’s apostolic succession to the Church of England.

Preface to the Prayer Book: (p. 10)

“But when in the course of Divine Providence, these American States became independent with respect to civil government, their ecclesiastical independence was necessarily included; and the different religious denominations of Christians in these States were left at full and equal liberty to model and organize their respective Churches, and forms of worship, and discipline, in such manner as they might judge most convenient for their future prosperity; consistently with the constitution and laws of their country.”

As a result of the revolution, Christianity in America developed in at least three distinct strains. Let’s look at those three briefly.

Roman Catholic: strong emphasis on dependence. Everything comes down from Rome. We had an example of that locally. Just a few years ago St. Peter’s Hospital was considering a merger with Robert Wood Johnson Hospital. It seemed like a good idea, these two hospitals being so close together. The administrators did a lot of work putting together a plan for how the hospitals could share resources, avoid duplication, and make the best use of each facility’s special abilities. But the final decision had to be made by the church, because St. Peter’s is a Catholic hospital. The decision was not made by the hospital administrators. Nor was it made by the local bishop of the diocese. It was made by the Pope. After all the work and planning the hospital staff had done, the Pope said no, and that was it.

Some people thought it strange that a decision about something so important to the community would be made by a man half way around the world who has never lived or worked in this community. But that’s how the Roman Catholic Church works. It is a very centralized authority structure with the local congregation being entirely dependent on that central authority.

A highly centralized authority structure can in many ways be very efficient, but there is more at stake than efficiency. There is also the question of direction. When you have good, faithful leaders in control, it works very well. But what happens when you have a bad leader? If no one can challenge or correct him, what do you do then?

Protestant: strong emphasis on independence, even at the level of the local parish. There is very little central authority structure. In many Protestant denominations even ordination is done by the local congregation, and pastors are completely at the mercy of the local church board. In some denominations the practice is to have an annual vote on the pastor at the annual meeting of the church. If he does not get a majority vote from the people, he’s fired, and there is no bishop, no higher authority he can appeal to.

This appeals to our American sense of democracy, but there can be problems here also. If the preacher is called by God to preach a message of rebuke and repentance that the people may not like to hear, all they have to do is vote him out. Very convenient for them, but it does not provide much opportunity for spiritual growth.

Anglican: What we have inherited is a “via media”. That isn’t just the name of our Diocesan newspaper. It is a term that has long been used to describe the Anglican way, a middle way between Catholicism and Protestantism, between dependence and independence. It is not a centralized authority structure, nor is it a totally democratic structure. It is a communion of communions.

We don’t have a Pope, but we do have spiritual leaders over our Communion who exercise real authority in consultation with each other over the mission and doctrine of the church. What we strive for in the Anglican tradition is interdependence. It’s patterned after the teaching of St. Augustine, “In the essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity.” The big question of course, how do you decide what is “essential” and what is not?

What we inherited from the Church of England was a deceptively simple formula for the life of a faithful church: Scripture, Tradition, and Reason. In that order. The binding link that makes the Anglican Communion work is not a person or a tradition or an institutional structure. It is the Word of God.

In the Anglican Communion, this communion of communions, there is great variety in forms and customs and styles of worship. But there is a great unity of vision when it comes to the Bible. We have always, at least until now, held scripture as the unifying tie that makes the communion workable.

Interdependence vs. Independence.

Interdependence is not an easy way of life to work out. Nor is it easy to define, and its definition usually becomes clearest when it is being challenged. There are many in the Episcopal Church today who would take us away from being interdependent, and instead opt for a church that is independent. Do you think that would be a good thing? Is that what you want, an American independent church that is no longer bound to temper its judgment according to the rest of the Communion?

Our leaders in the Episcopal Church have placed us in exactly this position in the recent debate about sexuality. Will we heed the urgent warnings of our partners around the world, or will we proceed on the present course without any further serious consideration of their viewpoint? Something to pray about over this 4^th of July weekend.

In the pews I placed copies of the Articles of Religion. This is the place where our tradition and our view of scripture are most extensively spelled out. Notice in Articles 19 and 20 you see our relationship to other denominations, and our view of the authority of scripture. It says that

“The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of Faith: and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God’s Word…”

It is this very thing which now threatens our communion. If we no longer honor this foundational belief, if we are prepared to ordain in the church something which is clearly contrary to scripture and 2000 years of church tradition, then how can we continue to be part of the Anglican Communion? Indeed, how can we continue to be Christian? For us, these two identities have always been linked. It is through the tradition we have received through the Anglican Communion that we understand how to continue as a Christian Church.

For several decades the Episcopal Church has been flirting with variations on authority that are not part of who we are. It began when Edmond Browning became Presiding Bishop and declared that his first job was to “gather the mind of the church.” Some saw in this a step toward making himself a kind of Pope. Rather than sitting among his fellow bishops as one among equals, he presumed to push his own agenda from the top down, especially the pro-homosexual agenda. And almost from the moment he began his crusade the Episcopal Church began to decline, and has done so ever since.

In the turmoil that has followed we see radical reactions moving in the other direction. Some are suggesting that the solution to our problem is “local option.” Let each bishop, each diocese determine its own policy of ordination. In the case of blessing homosexual couples, it also means letting each diocese write its own liturgy. The “Book of Common Prayer” would no longer be common. Are we to borrow from the worst of Protestantism and make each diocese, even each parish its own authority, no longer concerned about the rest of the Communion?

Preface to the Prayer Book, p. 11. In commenting on the preservation of our tradition of worship and our continuing relationship with the larger church beyond this land:

“It seems unnecessary to enumerate all the different alterations and amendments (to the Prayer Book.) They will appear, and it is to be hoped, the reasons of them also, upon a comparison of this with the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England. In which it will also appear that this Church (The Episcopal Church in America) is far from intending to depart from the Church of England in any essential point of doctrine, discipline, or worship; or further than local circumstances require.”

So you see, independence is a gift that we have always received with some reservation. Independence must always be tempered by self-restraint, and a godly consideration for the wisdom of others beyond ourselves.

One final comment about the flags. People have sometimes asked me why the flags in the church are on the wrong sides. According to “flag etiquette”, the American flag is always to be in the place of prominence, on the speaker’s right. In church, however, flag etiquette changes. There is an intentional message here.

This nation became great because of the spiritual values on which it was founded, the chief of those being that God always receives our first devotion, ahead of devotion to the nation. Patriotism without the foundation of faith in God is a dangerous loyalty. The founders of this country repeatedly made it clear that their only hope for this experiment in democracy to succeed was that God would bless it and the people would exercise their freedom in a godly and faithful way. They put their faith in God first. This nation will cease to be great when it forgets that. This is the message of the flags.

In every secular public building the American flag takes the place of precedence, on the speaker’s right, or audience left. But this is not a secular public building. This is the church of Jesus Christ, and in this place patriotism, love of nation is truly blessed and hallowed by taking its rightful and respectful place UNDER the authority and dominion of Almighty God.
In the armed forces, the Navy has a bit of flag etiquette that also gives us a precedent for this. It is allowed onboard ship that when a Christian worship service is going on, the church flag may be flown ABOVE the American flag.

Let us pray for the nation and the church.

We thank you, gracious Father, for calling us in this good land to be a people mindful of Your sovereign authority over all of creation. We thank you for giving us liberty, the freedom to worship You in this place, to call upon Your name and to proclaim Your truth without fear.

Give us the wisdom to use our freedom faithfully, the freedom to bless, not curse; the freedom to serve, not to dominate, freedom to give as we have received, not to hoard to ourselves.

We pray for those who take freedom of religion to mean freedom from religion. Draw them to Yourself. Use our lives as a living testimony to them.

We pray for a strong church in this nation, a church that speaks Your Word with conviction and ministers Your power with authority. We pray for revival, another outpouring of Your Holy Spirit like that which guided the founders of this nation.

May Your Holy Name be glorified in the church, and through the church, that this may once again be “one nation under God with liberty and justice for all.”