What are the ‘primary issues’, the essentials of the faith around which we unite as Christians; and what issues are ‘secondary’, or ‘adiaphora’? What do we do when sharp disagreements over these matters which, in theory, are seen as ‘indifferent’ compared to salvation, spill over into personal animosity and division?
Five years ago, colleagues and I began the project of forming a new church movement, Anglican in heritage, church order and global affiliation, but intentionally confessional and not aligned to Canterbury. At an initial meeting people from different backgrounds met to talk about the way forward. All were committed to the same understanding of the Bible’s authority and the same gospel; all had shown courage – in standing against revisionism in the official denomination; and in pioneering enterprise by church planting outside it. But it soon became clear that major divisions existed. Some agreed in theory that issues such as ordination of women, charismatic gifts, worship styles and administrative authority structures are ‘secondary’ or even ‘adiaphora’, but in practice they couldn’t see themselves part of the same church grouping as those who held different views.
In the wider Anglican scene, fellowship is sometimes strained or even non-existent between two types of gospel-affirming Anglicans: those who remain in the official structures and those who have left. And then, in recent times, another issue has come to the fore, dividing those who otherwise are united on the essentials of the gospel: the extent to which individuals are perceived to align with victims / survivors of safeguarding failures, or with the power structures perceived to have not taken these failures seriously enough or even covered them up.
It may be that these divisions are more of a problem for Anglicans like me than for denominations where people are more comfortable with expecting a degree of conformity on controversial, disputed matters. Does this mean that Anglicanism is inherently more wishy-washy than other denominations? Disputes and broken fellowship among Roman Catholics, Presbyterians and Baptists (and even Free Evangelicals?) would suggest that ‘adiaphora’ can lead to divisions in every denomination.
Is it better, then, not to have latitude about ‘adiaphora’? Should we replace the command to love and the wise counsel of appreciating differences in the united body of Christ with insisting that our particular brand and culture is the only possible sound vessel for the gospel? Or, to frame the question another way: are liberalism and ritualism so dangerous, and guarding the gospel so important, that establishing clear boundaries for fellowship may mean declaring some issues to be ‘primary’ which others may see as secondary? In our case in the Anglican Network in Europe, at that meeting five years ago we took the wise advice of an experienced leader, who suggested that the way forward was to form different ‘convocations’ which would become non-geographical Dioceses. These would have the freedom to develop their own policies on these secondary issues and gather like-minded congregations accordingly. They would be committed to submitting to the oversight of global church leaders, and to fellowship in mission with others in the Network, while preserving their own distinctives.
By God’s grace this has so far resulted in a wonderful sense of unity without uniformity. But we are aware that it doesn’t resolve the disputable issues, which can so often be fanned into sinful anger and division by social-media-driven groupthink. As evangelicals perhaps we need to praise God for the unity He has given us in Christ from our diverse backgrounds, maybe to repent of having treated brothers and sisters in Christ coldly or worse, repent of being quick to take offence and slow to reconcile, and then to pray for the help of the Spirit in building us up together in love? And then on that basis as a united people of God, we can work and pray together to reach our fractured societies into which we bring ourselves and the gospel.
Anglicans: ‘Choose whom you will serve’
I was part of a small contingent of a dozen delegates from the Gafcon Europe region who had the privilege …