• Not on our mailing list? Sign up now!

Presidential Address

Diocesan Synod. November 10th 2007

Of the Bible and Bishops (Authority in the Church of England)

Richard Hooker

In the midst of a period of considerable religious controversy in this country a priest, through his writing and preaching, defined the culture of our church. Richard Hooker, in Elizabethan England which was facing threats from Catholic Spain and from a powerful Puritan movement within the country, gave to the Church of England a self understanding and a way of thinking that has, in different generations, defined who we are.

The question of authority lay at the heart of Hooker's work and of the controversies of his day. It is that issue I wish to address among you today. To one side Hooker faced the Puritan challenge for further reform getting rid of episcopacy and replacing it with a Calvinist Presbyterian system and the elevation of the Bible and the preaching of the same to supreme authority in the total life of the church. To the other lay the lurking Catholic threat of a return to Rome and the removal of the Protestant Bishops. Both of them questioned whether the Church of England was a true church.

Archbishop Grindal - probably the most Protestant Archbishop we have ever had - said of the Puritans, ‘they take the livings of the English Church whilst believing it to be no church'.

Both the Puritan tradition and the Catholic tradition have found Hooker hard to live with. His method and his thought is a fundamental challenge to all forms of absolutism - be it around the Bible or Apostolic Succession.

The Bible

Hooker was in no doubt that the Bible is the Word of God. It is ‘God breathed'. It is the work of the Spirit of God and it brings us to Jesus Christ and to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is foundational to Anglican life and theology. The Bible has been given to us by God. This is a high doctrine of Scripture and it is rooted in the impact of the Reformation on the church in England.

It is, however, because and not in spite of that belief, that Hooker resisted the claims of those who seemed to think both that they had the Bible in their pocket or pulpit and that it was there to provide unambiguous answers to every question facing human kind. Because the Scriptures are the work of the Spirit of God they are over and against all of us. That they lead us to Christ in no way suggests that God does not speak to us through other means or that every person and faction had a right to claim the Bible in support of their opinion. In holding to this he was saying no more than can be found in the early Fathers, in St Augustine or, indeed, in the way Scripture handles itself.

Hooker did not hold to Calvin's view that Scripture is self-authenticating. He resisted the Puritan form of that doctrine when they maintained that it was through preaching that the truth of Scripture was made known to the believer and he further resisted the Anabaptist claim that there is a direct bond through the Spirit between the individual believer and their reading of Scripture..

Hooker was clear that the Bible has one supreme purpose as given by God. That is to bring us to salvation through Jesus Christ. It is not a handbook to give us immediate answers to every question concerning the governance of the church or of the patterns of Christian life. He even uses the language that it is clear on doctrine and ‘dark' on discipline. It has to be interpreted. That task requires an understanding of the tradition of the church - the corporate wisdom of the community of faith over the centuries - and the use of our reason and experience. That opened the door to acknowledge that we find the wisdom of God not just in Scripture but in the laws of nature and of society perceived by reasonable debate and scholarship.

Hooker is the one who systematically gives us that classic Anglican understanding of Scripture, Reason and tradition working together. He is clear that the authority of God's Word is undermined by any endeavour to try and extend its authority beyond its God given purpose. Not only does the church have to work hard at the Scriptures it must also bring the wisdom of the past and the understandings of the present to bear upon our interpretation of it.

Hooker looked for tolerance in the church and space for people to think and reason in the face of the demands of Scripture, contemporary understandings and the history of Christian thought.

At the end of a long and difficult sermon addressing the issue as to whether Roman Catholics could be treated as Christians - a dangerous subject in those days and a theme which would further alienate him from the Puritans - he said this, as he closed:-

"Now, finally, to you my beloved who have listened to all of this. I have no further admonition than this - that you remember it is neither scandalous nor offensive in difficult cases like this one to hear differing viewpoints. If you are tolerant and open-minded you may even find comfort in a variety of opinions."

In the afternoon, the Puritan preacher Travers, from the same pulpit almost branded Hooker a traitor for suggesting the pope might be saved!

The Church of England should not be afraid of difference and we should not apologise for complexity. We must hold on to our long and honoured tradition of doing theology in this manner. All of us should be looking for tolerance, reason, generosity and peace in the church.

Karl Barth in his great commentary on the Roman epistle said this as he turned into Chapter 12 and began to address ethics.

"If our thinking is not to be pseudo-thinking, we must think about life; for such thinking is thinking about God. And if we are to think about life, we must penetrate its hidden corners, and steadily refuse to treat anything - however trivial or disgusting it may seem - as irrelevant. To be sincere, our thought must share in the tension of human life, its criss-cross lines. And in its kaleidoscopic movements. And life is neither simple and straightforward, nor obvious. Things are simple and straightforward and obvious only when they are detached from their context and then treated superficially. The reality to which life bears witness must be disclosed in the deep things of all observable phenomena, in their whole context - and in their KRISIS."

In the face of the complex and delicate moral questions such as face us on our agenda today, if we follow Hooker and Barth and, indeed, a myriad other people who have guided us across the years - the Bible is given back to all of us. It leads us to Christ and guides us all together on our journey. To it we bring our life in all its complexity, the richness of our world and what we have discovered about it and the history of the work done by those who have gone before us.

Bishops

If the Puritans found Hooker difficult on the subject of the Bible, Catholics have not entirely warmed to his approach to Bishops. Hooker held to a number of things.

First, that the church had the right to order its own life provided that ordering did not contradict the principles of Scripture. He did not believe - and Anglicans do not believe - that Scripture provides us with a blueprint for the ordering of the church.

Second, he held that episcopacy is an apostolic institution. It developed late in apostolic times to meet the needs of the emerging church. So he held that the fundamental Episcopal order of the Church of England was consistent with Scripture and the pre-eminent order of the church across its history.

Third, he held that it was possible for the church to re-order its ministry - so he refused to give episcopacy an ontological status in the life of the church. Our classic Anglican way of speaking about this has been to see episcopacy as part of the bene esse of the church not part of its esse. It is good for the church, it is Biblical and we can be confident in it.

Finally, Hooker set out what he thought were the practical benefits of this system of church governance.

It is interesting to note that the attack on episcopacy from the Puritans came at a time when the quality of Episcopal governance was poor. Elizabeth had not, in general, succeeded in persuading the Marian Bishops to remain in office. So there were many new and inexperienced Bishops in her time. They were losing their medieval lordly status. One Bishop wrote in 1573, ‘we are the scum of the earth'. There was a large body of literature attacking the institution of episcopacy. Hooker made no attempt at defending the Elizabethan Bishops. He speaks of them coming into their sees like physicians learning medicine ‘by killing the sick'. He attacks their lack of kindness and courtesy and also their unwillingness to exercise any discipline. ‘What with ill usage of their power among the meaner, and what with disusage among the higher sort, they are in the eyes of both sorts as bees that have lost their sting'. (Taken from a paper by A.S.McGrade)

Nevertheless, Hooker was clear that Bishops have at the heart of their ministry the provision, ordering and oversight of ministry. One of the most important things I do as Bishop is to ordain and license people to ministry. With that I seek to ensure that ministry is provided where it is needed and is subject to proper support and oversight and discipline.

That is why a Bishop ought not to compromise the authority of his office in ordination. In Hooker's day Bishops were weak and too dependent on the Crown and too little assertive of their fundamental authority in the provision, care and ordering of ministry. The Bishop, within the bounds of what is properly lawful, sets the conditions for ordination and for the pastoral oversight of clergy and all who hold his licence. No one, under their oath of obligation, can turn round and say that they are not willing to accept the rule the Bishop makes and expect, nevertheless, to proceed to ordination. Furthermore, I hold that Ministry Review and Episcopal Review fall within the boundaries of what reasonably a Bishop should expect from people in licensed ministry and under oath.

The Church of England has held firm to the Episcopal shape of its life in good times and in difficult times. Hooker had learned well from Bishop John Jewel. These foundations, laid through his thinking, were built upon through the theological and spiritual inheritance of the Carolingian divines and in the restoration of the order of the Church of England after 1660.

There is a dangerous drift within Anglicanism today to look for Bishops after our own image. If we do not like the one we have we must look for another and more congenial one. All parties in the church have a habit of speaking and thinking in this way. I have increasingly come to the conclusion that it matters less and less what back ground Bishops come from provided they have a grip on what their office is for in the good ordering of the life of the church. What is it that God has called me to be and to do that belongs to my role as Bishop? Seeking vocations, watching over the formation of people for ordained and lay ministry, ordaining and licensing people for ministry and ensuring both the effective deployment and oversight of that ministry is at its heart. That is one of the crucial ministries which I believe I can offer to enable our mission today. Through that ministry we seek to ensure that the Gospel is proclaimed and the faith of Jesus Christ taught across the diocese. We do this in that open and quintessentially Anglican way of reasoned and careful Biblical theology engaging with the contemporary life of our people today.

Order and Liberty

These fundamental principles and cultures of Anglican life - the way we treat the Bible as the Word of God and the acceptance of the ministerial structures of authority in the church provide the boundaries of our shared life together.

It is often said that order and liberty are to be held in balance. I believe they are inextricably held together and feed each other. If people want liberty in which to push forward in new patterns of mission that can only be preserved from anarchy and from eventual death by the acceptance of the good order of the whole church. Good order is there, not to enforce conformity, but to enable the flourishing of the life of the church in all its many traditions and emerging forms. The test of order is its capacity to liberate. So we resist both the anarchy of sectarianism and the corrupt abuse of excessive power.

A good understanding of the Bible and a rejoicing in our history of its use together with a flourishing of our episcopally ordered church enable us to live at peace with one another. Peace within the church was Hooker's deepest desire and dream. It should remain at the heart of our endeavour, our prayer and our witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In a world where so many struggle to live at peace across the differences of life we are all under obligation to live at peace with one another.

At the end of this Synod I will be leaving for Israel/Palestine to visit Christian Aid partners. The theme of peace and justice across difference and division is fundamental to their future. Pray for us and for the peace of Jerusalem.

 

---