The Archbishop Reflects

The Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev. Rowan Williams, has issued a reflection on the recent actions and decisions of General Convention 2009. His reflection can be found here. There is much good comment out there, including at Thinking Anglicans and Seven whole days.

I found myself taking issue with a couple of things that the Archbishop wrote. The first comes near the beginning, when he disappointingly repeats the notion that a concern for the full inclusion of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in the life of the church is a matter of human rights and civil liberties. This is usually held out as somehow being in opposition to a Biblically and theologically based concern. He then goes on to suggest that the requisite exegetical and theological work have not been done. It seems clear to me that for many people, the concern for full inclusion is precisely a matter of trying faithfully to live out the demands of the Gospel. For so many people, an attention to the sweep and fullness of Scripture - not just a handful of verses - leads to the conclusion that the church needs to move in new directions. As many have pointed out, exegesis and theologizing have been going on for decades. While there is always a need to do a better job of thinking clearly and deeply, and of communicating that work, perhaps the issue here is that some folks just don't like the conclusions that have been drawn from that work.

Another concern is with this statement: "...a person living in such a (same sex) union is in the same case as a heterosexual person living in a sexual relationship outside the marriage bond;" Is this not the tired, frustrating circular argument that "we will not recognize the validity of your committed relationship, therefore you are living in sin just like a promiscuous heterosexual person because you are not in a valid relationship because we won't recognize the validity....?"

Finally (in order for me to have the traditional three points), Archbishop Rowan raises the thorny question of the need for consensus/agreement across the church in order to make changes. The Communion, let alone the Church Catholic, is not in agreement on these issues of full inclusion, and so we should not be proceeding. Really? While the need to respect the larger church community and recognize our deep interconnectedness is profoundly important, and it can be way too convenient to claim the movement of the Holy Spirit and charge off in our own new direction, must there be full agreement before anything can change? Would we have changed positions on race, or women, or circumcision if everyone had to approve? What about the little matter of the English Reformation - where was Rome's approval?

There is much to ponder and digest in Archbishop Williams' reflection. I invite your thoughts and comments.