Taking a stand for truth

In October, a South African bishop ordained three staff members of the Co-Mission Initiative churches, based in South West London, whose senior pastor is Richard Coekin. The Bishop of Southwark has since revoked Richard’s licence as a Church of England minister (see front page article).

Since the ordinations, there have been media interviews, in which Richard Coekin has clarified that his main concern is about the authority of the Bible in the modern Church of England. From right across the country, evangelical churches and individuals have inundated Richard’s church office with emails and letters of unqualified support. There have been messages from abroad, not just from South Africa, but from Australia, America, Brazil and more, simply saying that they agree wholeheartedly with what Richard is seeking to do.

The heart of the matter

At the heart of the furore is the statement by the House of Bishops on the Civil Partnerships Bill, which calls upon Anglican clergy to recognise same-sex unions. The Bishop of Southwark, in whose diocese the Co-Mission churches operate, supports this statement, and these churches saw their fellowship with the Bishop impaired by his stance. Since the Bishop had refused for two years to ordain men to lead the church plants of the Co-Mission Initiative, the ordinations went ahead with Bishop Martin Morrison of the Church of England in South Africa (CESA) presiding. This met a pressing need for the churches, but was also a protest concerning what the bishops had said on civil partnerships.

The action was taken as a matter of conscience and in consultation with many other people and with the backing of the Reform National Conference. It demonstrated that some within the Church of England are serious about looking elsewhere for Anglican ministry if the English bishops are not going to remain loyal to Scripture. That may have been what shocked the establishment. They did not think that anybody would actually do anything. The Bishop of Southwark responded by revoking Richard Coekin’s licence.

The future of Anglicanism

While in London a couple of weeks ago, I happened to meet up with another senior Anglican clergyman, who expressed the gravity of the situation. There is an increasing distance between English Anglicanism and Anglicanism in the rest of the world. He said that, if things are not handled biblically in England, he could foresee worldwide Anglicanism sidelining Canterbury. I think that, if the House of Bishops decides to try and dig its heels in, giving no ground on their statement on civil partnerships, and if Canterbury stands with them and doesn’t respond to questions raised by the Global South Archbishops, it is just possible that the rest of the Anglican community might move on from Canterbury. However, the establishment of the Church of England in this country is nothing if not politically astute. So it is doubtful that the Archbishop of Canterbury will respond in that way. It is more likely they will try to find a way to accommodate the widespread disquiet over the bishops’ statement.

Disgrace?

Richard Coekin’s situation in the Church of England is unusual. In practical terms, the loss of his licence does not mean the loss of his salary or home, because he is employed and housed by a proprietary chapel trust. If he were in the usual setup for a C of E vicar, the consequences would have been far more serious for him. Given Richard’s situation, it seems that he felt an obligation to take the lead and publicly declare that his bishop has departed from Scripture and left him and the Co-Mission churches in temporary impaired communion.

Normally a licence is revoked for the protection of the congregation from gross immorality or heresy. Considering that the Church of England tolerates such a wide range of doctrinal diversity and, of course, immorality of various kinds, it is pretty miserable to have his congregations associated with such disgrace. It appears to an outsider like myself that in revoking Richard’s licence, the Bishop of Southwark has acted precipitately.

CESA

Some have suggested that the ordinations were illegal. But I understand that the foreign clergy measure, which is often quoted specifically, does not apply to a CESA bishop.

Here we need to fill in some background. There are two ‘Anglican’ denominations in South Africa. First, there is the Church of the Province, which is normally recognised as the Anglican presence in South Africa. This is the larger denomination and tolerates liberalism. If you define Anglicanism in terms of being in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury, then this is the official Anglican church.

Secondly, there is the Church of England in South Africa (CESA). This is smaller, but a thoroughly Reformed body loyal to the 39 Articles. If you define Anglicanism in terms of loyalty to the Articles, this is a true Anglican church. This denomination is not normally invited to the Lambeth conferences. But it has had a good and close relationship with the diocese of Sydney for a very long time.

The ordinands are CESA ordinands. It has been suggested that, since CESA is not officially part of the worldwide Anglican communion, it was like having the men ordained into the Baptist or Methodist church. But this is not true. The ordinands are not claiming to be Church of England ordinands, but they have been ordained into the Anglican tradition. So, as far as I understand, they would not need to be re-ordained if they were to be employed in a regular parish church elsewhere in this country.

A clergyman’s obligation

Richard Coekin has appealed against the revoking of his licence to the Archbishop of Canterbury. Church of England vicars are obliged by their ordination oath (as is any bishop) to defend the truth and drive away error. Richard Coekin’s contention is that the House of Bishops’ statement on civil partnerships is illegal and contrary to Anglican doctrine because it clearly requires clergy to recognise same-sex unions, which the Lambeth Conference has already said should not be done. The Anglican document Some Issues in Human Sexuality clarified that same-sex unions are contrary to Scripture, and the 39 Articles of the Church of England say that nothing can be required which is contrary to Scripture. This means that the House of Bishops’ statement is not legal under the Anglican rules. Therefore, it should not be imposed upon the clergy by the bishops. Hence Richard Coekin has appealed to the Archbishop that it is his duty, and the duty of all bishops, to seek to reject it.

Cleft stick?

Because of the action of the Bishop of Southwark in revoking Richard Coekin’s licence, it looks as if the Archbishop of Canterbury is in a very difficult situation. He either shows to the watching world that he is not prepared to remain loyal to traditional Scriptural Anglican teaching on this issue, or he has to undermine the Bishop of Southwark and the House of Bishops by reinstating Richard. Obviously, Richard hopes that he will be reinstated, and the considerable distress among mainstream Anglican evangelicals, who are very concerned about the bishops’ stance, addressed.

Many of us who are Nonconformists would ask why evangelicals within the Church of England want to stay within the denomination when they have to fight like this simply to maintain biblical teaching and morality within the church. Their answer would be that they feel that the Church of England is actually their church. They are the ones who are seeking to stand by the 39 Articles. If anyone should leave, it should be those who are departing from the historic position of the Church of England.

Stand together

Now is the time for evangelicals within the Church of England to stand together behind what Richard has done. Could the protest have been crafted better or made at a better time? There are always pros and cons on such matters. And it may be that some people’s feathers have been ruffled by the fact that Richard has had the guts to take a stand whereas others have kept silent. But the issues should be seen as far bigger than the discomfort of ruffled feathers.

The Co-Mission church plants have also been a source of disquiet for some. But this is mainly due to misunderstanding. There is no evidence of the church plants undermining local parish churches. In only one situation was it done without the permission of the parish vicar and there the church plant has been reshaped as a free church so as not to compromise that situation. Some detractors don’t seem to know about permissions given by the previous Bishop of Kingston for the Co-Mission churches to go ahead with church planting.

We would encourage EN readers to pray about this situation in the Church of England. It may well be that coming months will see Anglicanism in our country at a major crossroads. We should pray that Richard and the Co-Mission Initiative churches will be able to be gracious, but bold in ‘contending for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints’ (Jude 3). We should pray that the secular world will recognise the integrity behind the action that has been taken and that they may realise that the Co-Mission churches are just ordinary Christians seeking to be loyal to the Scriptures and to Christ with a good conscience.

Taking a stand for truth

The Co-Mission churches controversy within the Church of England