All over the globe, in neglected cemeteries, lie Anglican missionaries who left behind home and hearth and family to take the Christian Gospel to distant parts of the world. To borrow the poet Rupert Brookeâs immortal words, there are many corners of many foreign fields that are forever the Church of England. These efforts were at their height in the 19th century, when the expansion of the European empires opened up new possibilities for evangelists.
Such is the root of the Anglican Communion, by some measures the worldâs third-largest Christian denomination, originally formed more than 150 years ago. There have always been tensions and disagreements, but two particular transformations â the dissolution of the British Empire, and the rapid spread of liberal moral views in Western churches â have gradually undermined the traditional view that the Archbishop of Canterbury was in some sense the head of the Communion, primus inter pares.
Now it seems that this loss of confidence in Canterbury as the focal point for Anglican unity may be formalised in new plans for the leadership of the Communion. The Times reports that in future the role of head of the Communion may be shared, on a rotating basis, similar to the presidency of the European Council which cycles between EU members.
This kind of development has been on the cards for a very long time. Disagreements over sex, marriage, gender and â to a lesser extent â womenâs ordination have laid bare deep and irreconcilable differences between and within various national churches. The Anglican churches of the old âwhite dominionsâ of Canada, New Zealand and Australia, as well as Americaâs Episcopal Church (TEC), have largely yielded, in practice if not in formal doctrine, to the dogmas of social liberalism.
In other nations â those in which a majority of all practising Anglicans live â there has been no such adjustment to post-Sixties norms, and attempts by Anglicans from the developed world to export liberal theology have been regarded, not always unjustly, as a new form of imperialism. Coincidentally or not, these countries tend to have very well-attended churches. It is an over-simplification to say that Western churches have most of the money and the implicit expectation that they get to set the agenda, while the Global South has the vitality, the numbers, and the doctrinal rigour, but it is, as they say, directionally correct.
There are already well-established dissenting blocs within the Communion, such as the Global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (GAFCON) and the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches (GSFA), who have both declared themselves opposed to the revisionism coming from the English-speaking world. Individual churches that have fully broken away from the Communion have also aligned themselves with such groups. In 2023, 10 Anglican archbishops declared themselves to be in âimpaired communionâ with the Church of England after the authorisation of blessings for same-sex relationships.
If this proposal is adopted, then, it is more a case of bowing to the inevitable and recognising implacable facts on the ground, than a bold new experiment. The era of British cultural dominance within the Anglican world has long passed. With the Empire a fading memory, believers around the world are no longer willing to be ordered around by bishops from countries where observance is in sharp decline, and who have lost their confidence in the Christian moral order.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribePerhaps as the C of E dies new churches will spring up – churches that trust in Jesus more than business models and relativism.
You may find this discussion entertaining, if somewhat painful, but at least it is clarifying:
https://youtu.be/C8EqGLTDnB8
It’s about a lot more than the title suggests, it wasn’t quite what I expected! đ
Watched the YouTube conversation. Brilliant! Essential viewing. Thank you.
One big difference not noted here is that the Church of England is unique in Anglicanism in being the only established state church. This may not be coincidental when it comes to its decline. A state church sits light to all doctrine because it needs to be as inclusive as possible of all varieties of belief, and thus finds it hard to say definitively, ‘This is what we believe.’
Good point.
Better to disestablish it then.
You are possibly forgetting about the Church of Scotland which is Presbyterian
Fair enough. Within 20 years most native worshippers in England will be long dead, with only the immigrant communities keeping the Church going. Itâs only fair those countries that still provide the worshippers have more say in how the Church is run
It is hard to imagine how the senior UK Anglican clergy imbued with guilt over past sins of imperialism and slavery can at the same time cling to a controlling role in Anglican doctrine. Numbers of the faithful should be the deciding factor rather than pale stale traditional arrangements. Hard for the âenlightenedâ Anglicans to resist one would have thought.
Did you know that everyone is a sinner?
And it’s personal, not about what happened hundreds of years ago. My slightly earlier post, has a useful link where more is revealed.
By some measures the third world’s largest denomination? Wouldn’t have minded a link to where this supposition comes. I had been under the impression that it definitely was, likely to overtake Eastern Orthodoxy in about 25 years time due to birth and conversion rates. It is already the second largest if you accept the self-imposed schism of the Russian Orthodox Church over Ukrainian autocephaly.
As a non-believer, here’s an objective view.
Immigration to the UK from Commonwealth countries has resulted in many new places of worship springing up in communities, especially where the African diaspora have settled, and also re-vitalising existing buildings which might otherwise have been falling into wrack and ruin (or taken over by other faiths).
It’s strangely gratifying to see this, purely from a ‘community’ point of view where people respect their surroundings and seek to improve upon them, whilst looking to lead productive lives and encourage others to do so.
As a result, they have the wind in their sails and if that means their leaders have at least an equal weight in the overall Anglican communion, so be it.
Revitalising new buildings that might otherwise….
In my my experience of the last two decades in Lambeth, that is a charitable characterisation of the new evangelical churches on the ground.
You know it’s Sunday when the revitalising screaming of some paid for exorcism starts up.
Fair point, and thanks for the insight, the breath of fresh air of actual practise.
I’m not familiar with what goes on at these ‘gatherings’ (how would i be?) but if there’s anything that needs calling out, let it happen.
Who’s aware of this, and what are they doing about it?
Just be careful with your extrapolation. This may not be the common experience but rather fit your set mind.
Last week I passed a middle-aged woman of African heritage who was standing at the entrance of a deserted railway station in London. Not taking one of her leaflets, she called out, “Jesus is coming soon”. “Thank God”, I replied.
The Apostle Paul would never have has anything to do with the idea that there could be black or white churches.
I donât have a bone here as a Catholic, but see this as a reflection of our own loss of faith in all sorts of ways, including God. Apologetic progressive liberal ideals wonât sustain a global faith in anything important.
‘loss of confidence in Canterbury’ because for the first time in history the truth comes about.
I think the nail on the head lies in ‘moral order’.
Were I to suddenly find myself in an alternate reality I believe that outwith the poverty I would prefer to be an African Anglican in Africa. The picture of a Midsomer type Anglican church is unfortunately close to the reality in many shires of the UK and in the cities a community run by a “Call me Keith” priest. Would I be a member of the white congregation? Perhaps not. A full on congregation dealing with life’s vicissitudes would be good for my soul.
The Edwardian Bishop of Durham, Handley G C Moule, wrote of the discrepancy between what the European missionaries preached and the example of the behaviour of Europeans in the treaty ports.
Given that experience, it’s somewhat astonishing that Christianity took root among the locals of the British Empire.
And it’s not the case that the memory of the Empire is fading. It no longer exists as even a memory among anyone of any of the younger generations. The memory of the Church of England is close behind. None of the young people I spent last Christmas with gave a single thought to the Church or Christ.
Bishop Moule also noted that British missionaries took their families abroad, where, as in China in 1900, their children were murdered in uprisings. But it was all for Christ.
Nor were these missionary activities rewarded with the number of converts commensurate with the great effort and expense that was expended on them. The American missionary of the early 20th century, Samuel Zwemer, spent decades in Egypt and Arabia but only made a handful of converts.
If the C of E seeks to replicate the arrangement of the circulating presidency of the EU, this is rather ironic as the EU purged all references to the Christian influences in European civilisation.