Cathedral News
Announcements for the week of July 18, 2010
From the Dean
“Pushing the envelope” is a familiar phrase. Most of us, in one area of our lives or another, actually put this saying into practice, testing the limits of understanding, knowledge or established orthodoxy in a given field. In Anglicanism, “pushing the envelope” is not a foreign concept, as the tripartite structure of Anglican theological activity; scripture, tradition and reason; produces an open environment in which new ideas or discoveries are not rejected out of hand but are put through a “process of reception” that may or may not result in the acceptance of something novel. Most often, it is in academic circles where envelopes get “pushed” with the greatest intensity. The discourse is held among those whose passion is questioning the historical, scriptural or theological suppositions that lie at the base of what we normally think of as Nicene theology, those core beliefs that are encapsulated within the Nicene Creed. Within the rarified atmosphere of the academy, such questioning and skepticism is healthy, as it serves, in the end, to strengthen the standing of fundamental Christian theological principles. Much as iron is strengthened in the fire of the furnace, so faith and belief is strengthened as it is tested by uncertainty.
However, there is a fine line between “pushing the envelope” and eliminating the container altogether. As Bishop Frey is fond of saying, “Anglicanism is a pretty broad river, flowing between wide banks. When you take away the banks entirely, though, you don’t have a river anymore, just a swamp.” I appreciate our Anglican ethos immensely, as it invites us into the Body of Christ with a brain. Ours is not the church of sola scriptura, nor is the gathering under nihil obstat and imprimatur; it is the body that lives graciously with “scripture, tradition and reason.” Our freedom as Anglicans to explore and question comes with a responsibility, however. That responsibility is to take seriously the “banks” defined by scripture and tradition, lest we find ourselves lost in the swamp of “reason alone.”
One of the greatest scandals in the Church is just this, when a leader purposefully strikes out into the swampy morass of skepticism for its own sake. I think, for example, of John Spong or Richard Holloway, bishops and leaders in the Church, people of vital ministry, whose excursions into “philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition,” to borrow from our reading from Colossians this morning, have caused great confusion to the Body of Christ. Bishop Holloway, indeed, following his retirement as Primus of the Church of Scotland, declared himself completely to have lost his faith. Taken on its own, such a confession is a cause of great sadness, and it raises the question of how seriously an individual takes the responsibility of leaders in the Church to chart a course between the banks, at times, admittedly, by propulsion of faith alone.
The words in this morning’s reading that got me thinking along these lines, meditating about the breadth of our intellectual tradition, are these, from Colossians: “For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily…” These are amazing words! If we accept Pauline authorship for this Epistle, then it must be dated to between 40 and 50 AD. Even if we think that Paul is not the author, and that someone else wrote this letter to the Church in Colossae in his style, the date is no later than 80 or 85 AD. Here, then, in the First Century of the Church, we have testimony to the theological notion of Jesus being both fully God and fully man. In the arcane language of early theologians, the language of Nicaea, two natures dwell fully in one person (hypostasis). Some who have tried to “push the envelope” of an orthodox understanding of who Jesus is have said that the notion of a “hypostatic union” (two natures in one person) is the invention of later theologians, unduly influenced by Greek thought. It is even suggested by some that the “historic Jesus” must be disentangled from much later theological accretions. And yet, here is the nucleus of our understanding of who Jesus is, and why God’s plan of redemption through him can be accomplished.
We have a message to take to the world, a message of the good news of God’s transforming love, given to us through his Son, Jesus. It’s not a bad thing to “push the envelope” in which the message is transmitted. Push too hard, though, and the envelope is torn asunder, and we are left with nothing useful in which we can carry the message to a world yearning for healing, wholeness and redemption.