The notes in the text are hyperlinked into the end notes; to return to the text, click on the end note number
Dear Fulcrum friends,
'Order, order' is the familiar cry from the Speaker of the House of Commons during a debate. It could be interpreted as, 'now settle down, keep quiet, so that we can follow our regular procedures which allow people to be heard and questioned.' This phrase encapsulates the provision of space and restraint necessary for discussion.[1]
Order in the Church of England, and the Anglican Communion, is also of vital importance and is more ancient than particular procedures in Parliament. 'To take orders' is 'to enter holy orders by ordination'. This combination of meanings, 'ordination' and 'customs of procedure', coalesce when we consider recent events in south London. Were they judicious or precipitate?
In this Fulcrum newsletter, we shall be considering the events themselves, discussing issues that can be supported or questioned and finally reflecting on some passages in Paul's second letter to the Corinthians.
A. The Events: Out-of-Order Ordinations
On 2 November 2005, the unauthorized ordination of three deacons[2], took place in Christ Church, Surbiton,[3] instigated by Richard Coekin, a minister of Emmanuel Church, Dundonald,[4] Wimbledon, in the Diocese of Southwark, and encouraged by the conservative Evangelical group, Reform.[5] This was without the permission, and at the time, the knowledge, of Tom Butler, the Bishop of Southwark.[6]
Since the ordaining Bishop, Martin Morrison, is from the Church of England in South Africa (CESA)[7], which is not in communion with the Church of England and the Anglican Communion, and the liturgy was the CESA rite, the ordinations were uncanonical and so those ordained were not ordained in the Church of England[8]. Questions may well be asked as to whether those involved in the service even followed the Handbook of Procedures of CESA and so it is not clear that the ordinations were 'regular' even according to CESA's rules[9].
Tom Butler, Bishop of Southwark, revoked the license of Richard Coekin[10], and in doing so received the backing of 40 evangelical Anglican clergy in the Diocese of Southwark[11], which is to be compared with the 7 evangelical Anglican clergy from Southwark, who signed the open letter backing the ordinations[12]. Richard Coekin then appealed to the Archbishop of Canterbury[13] and issued a press release. In the press release he is described as 'Senior Pastor to the fast-growing "Co-Mission" churches of South-west London.' This non-Anglican title, which claims oversight[14] of a named series of churches, none of which are part of the Diocese of Southwark, contrasts with the actual title of his license, 'Assistant Minister of the Proprietary Chapel of Emmanuel Wimbledon', which was mentioned in the Bishop's letter revoking the license. This mismatch in terminology is significant.
What are the wider, background issues of mission and ecclesiology involved here?
B. Issues to Support
1. Evangelism and Church Planting
Richard Coekin is a gifted evangelist and organizer, with a great concern for sharing the good news of Christ and starting new churches. The Church of England urgently needs evangelists who can reach people right outside the confines of the Church and lead them on to discipleship and maturity in Christ and his Church.
2. Mission-Shaped Church and 'Fresh Expressions'
The irony of this current confrontation is that it has occurred just as the Church of England officially, and synodically, has woken up to contemporary issues of evangelism and church planting in response to the best-selling General Synod report 'Mission-Shaped Church'[15].
Rowan Williams has launched 'Fresh Expressions'[16], led by Steve Croft, former Warden of Cranmer Hall, the evangelical theological college in Durham. In his Presidential address to General Synod on 16 November 2005, he outlined the initiative and, in very careful words given the context, described a 'principled and careful loosening of structures':
We have already made to encourage new expressions of the Church's local life, and what has been done in a short space of time by Steve Croft and others is immensely encouraging (we already know of some 300 new initiatives, and calculate that about 20,000 people have been contacted through these initiatives; and this is only a small part of a picture whose details are being further uncovered every day)...
Some of our legislative programme is about what could be called a principled and careful loosening of structures to assist the process. For this to be effective and to have integrity, we need opportunities to be clear about the difference between some of the basic principles of order in the Church and the fairly varied ways in which they are worked out.
There are solid theological reasons for holding to our threefold ministerial order. But I suspect that we shall need a good deal of imagination to find appropriate ways of incarnating this order in new settings. A deacon is a great deal more than an apprentice priest, a sort of ministerial probationer. A priest is someone gifted by God with the authority to gather and give voice to the common prayer of God's people - not a leader or manager on a secular model, not even just a teacher. A bishop is not simply a territorial co-ordinator or even just a sacramental focus, but the person who makes a community of ordained and lay ministers of the gospel work effectively in mission.
So if this Synod is going to give the support it should to the continuance of the Mission-Shaped Church agenda, let it be willing to use its imagination about ordained ministry.[17]
Clearly, the CESA ordinations in Surbiton could not be described as an example of 'principled and careful loosening of the structures' since they ignored the diocesan bishop. Comparisons may be made with the church planting strategy of Holy Trinity Brompton which has made a point of working closely with, and under the authority of, the Bishop of London. In that context, there is mutual respect and real 'co-mission'.
C. Issues to Question
1. Schism
Making your own arrangements for ordinations without telling the diocesan bishop is not a new venture in the history of the Christian Church. Its sharp name was mentioned by Tom Butler: schism. The 'separatist ecclesiological' background to this confrontation has been described by Stephen Kuhrt, an evangelical in the diocese.[18]
2. Part of a Planned Strategy
Documents on the Reform website show clearly that such ordinations are part of a Reform strategy. 'Ways Forward in the Present Crisis for the Church of England'[19] includes sections on 'Impaired Communion', 'Adequate Episcopal Oversight' and 'Establishing a Panel of Reference For Recognition Of Ministry Within The Wider Church'.
It states:
Members of Reform, if they have not done so already, should seek to establish where their diocesan bishop stands on the issue of human sexuality. Where they are unable to hold to orthodox biblical teaching, churches should declare that they are in 'impaired communion' - such is the crisis in the Church of England and the Anglican Communion.
Then it goes on to claim:
As impaired communion can only be temporary, what is now being called in the Anglican Communion 'Adequate Episcopal Oversight' will, therefore, be sought during the absence of spiritual oversight. There will be appeals to bishops elsewhere in the Communion who, like the 13 Primates from the Global South, are willing to take a stand.
'Impaired communion' presents particular challenges for churches when it comes to proposing candidates for training to the ordained ministry and then subsequently placing them in title posts. This brings us to an important proposal: the establishment of a panel of reference.
The concept of the Panel of Reference is introduced:
Where a parish is in impaired communion with a Diocesan bishop, many of the normal diocesan legal and administrative arrangements will temporarily have to continue. However, when a parish in impaired communion wishes to have a curate or to put forward a candidate for training for the ordained ministry, new arrangements will be required. There will be difficulties in not being able to turn to the Diocesan bishop. We therefore propose the establishment of a panel of reference. Potential candidates could then be referred to this panel to evaluate their suitability for training. At the end of the training, the panel can advise those bishops willing to provide alternative oversight, on a candidate's suitability for ordination.
A paper elucidating this 'Panel of Reference' for 'necessary action', by Mark Burkill dated 30 August 2005, is also available on the Reform site.[20]
So this action was not unpremeditated, but part of a strategy. The strategy, however, now put into practice, has surfaced as schismatic.
3. Precipitate Action which Divides
The CESA ordination has divided evangelicals, but with the vast majority questioning its provocative action. The letter of support mentioned above, signed by 40 evangelicals in the diocese of Southwark[21] shows that it is not a case of 'evangelicals' against a 'liberal bishop'. Nor is it a case of 'conservative evangelicals' against 'open evangelicals'[22] and a 'liberal bishop', for there are 'conservative evangelicals' who question it[23]. Nor is it a case of 'the whole of Reform' being behind the action, for Wallace Benn has refrained from public support. So the backing that may have been hoped for has not, in fact, been forthcoming.
4. The Claiming of Charles Simeon as a Precedent
Richard Coekin, in his letter of appeal to the Archbishop of Canterbury, claimed the precedent of the father of evangelical Anglicanism, Charles Simeon of Cambridge.
At the beginning of the CMS (founded in 1799) there were irregular ordinations organized by the great Charles Simeon of Holy Trinity, Cambridge. These ordinations were opposed by bishops in the church who refused to ordain men to go overseas. As evangelicals they were objected to on doctrinal grounds: they were called "Calvinists". But the imperatives of the gospel meant that men had to be ordained. So Charles Simeon helped organize the first ordinations in 1813. Fortunately there were a few bishops who broke ranks and were willing to act irregularly. Bishop Ryder (Bishop of Gloucester, then of Lichfield and Coventry) and Bishop Bathurst (Bishop of Norwich) were prepared to ordain "men at the [CMS] committee's request, accepting as a title the committee's agreement to semploy them" (Stock, History of CMS, vol. 1, p 245). Even the Archbishop of York ordained men in this way on two or three occasions. Then in 1819 came an Act of Parliament that enabled these irregularities to be sorted out with the Bishop of London having responsibility for ordaining men, or seeing that they were ordained, for the colonies. Because we are committed to the Church of England as our evangelical forefathers were, we do not want schism. Rather we want reform as they did. Hence we deplore the action of the Bishop of Southwark.
The irony of Richard Coekin claiming Charles Simeon as a precedent is breathtaking. Not only were these 19th century ordinations clearly carried out by Church of England diocesan bishops, but Simeon himself would have been the last person to have appreciated the uncanonical CESA ordinations in Southwark.
Hugh Evan Hopkins, in his biography of Simeon[24], has summed up Simeon's attitude to church order:
No one could have been more loyal to his bishop, as witness his last visit to Ely.[25] The fact that Bishop Allen was not a man of any special eminence or spirituality (of his sermons when published the Christian Observer commented 'We are unable to discover a single reason why they should have been dug out of their obscurity')[26] in no way lessened Simeon's respect for his office. No one did more than he to retain within the established church those evangelical enthusiasts whose zeal for preaching the gospel tempted them at times to ignore its rules and regulations. It was his love of his own church, his satisfaction with its liturgy, and his belief that the reformers in the 16th century had faithfully brought it back to the Bible, that led Simeon to pray that his own magnus opus[27] might be used 'not to strengthen a party in the church, but to promote the good of the whole.' His enthusiastic loyalty was so infectious that most of the 'serious' young men who gathered round him, and who could so easily have been carried away by the extremists of the day, were retained to make their full contribution to the very needy national church.
This quotation shows Charles Simeon's key influence as well as his loyalty to his bishop and concern for church order. The sentence 'not to strengthen a party in the church, but to promote the good of the whole' finds itself echoed in Fulcrum's elucidated aim.[28]
Hopkins continues:
'There is every reason to believe,' wrote the biographer of Rowland Hill, 'that the observance of order, which has been so judiciously regarded by Mr Simeon and his followers at Cambridge, has tended greatly to promote the influence of numbers of the zealous clergy who are now so vigilantly and successfully defending the best interests of the church.'[29]
So, Simeon, far from being 'precipitate' was in fact 'judicious'. Let those who are keen on claiming the importance of the Thirty Nine Articles of Religion[30], as Simeon indeed was, consider the following texts:
Article 23 'Of Ministering in the Congregation'. 'It is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office public preaching, or administration of the Sacraments in the Congregation, before he be lawfully called and sent to execute the same.'
Article 26 'On the unworthiness of the Ministers which hinders not the effect of the Sacraments.' 'Although in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometimes the evil have chief authority in the ministration of the Word and Sacraments; yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ's, and do minister by his commission and authority, we may use their Ministry, both in hearing the Word of God, and in receiving the Sacraments.'[31]
The distinction, in Article 26, between the 'office' and the 'person' is particularly pertinent in these discussions. While not recognizing it in his relationship with his diocesan bishop, in appealing to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Richard Coekin, in effect and ironically, admits this distinction.
D. Reflections on Paul's Second Letter to the Corinthians
The 'out-of-order ordination' of three men in Surbiton may be contrasted with the three authorized men in Paul's second letter to the Corinthians. These men were, literally, 'bearers of the word' in that they delivered the actual letter. The context of chapter 9 is one of real co-mission and involves 'order, grace and money'. It is also worth noting that an earlier section (6:14-7:1) dealt with standing firm on issues of holiness.[32]
Paul is encouraging the gentile Corinthians to imitate the gracious generosity of Christ and follow the example of the gentile Macedonians by contributing generously to 'the collection' for Jewish Christians in Jerusalem. This fund raising was of three fold importance: it was a material gift to relieve need; a profound symbol of unity across deep racial divisions and doctrinal emphases; and a theological 'thank you' for the sharing of the good news from Jerusalem out to the rest of the world. In the end, Paul was arrested in Jerusalem, and died in Rome, as a result of carrying out this project of material, ecclesial and theological unity.
Paul is giving 'good references' for Titus and his two colleagues (see also 3:1-3). Titus is described as a 'partner and co-worker' (8:23). He writes: 'With him we are sending the brother who is famous among all the churches for his proclaiming of the good news; and not only that, but he has also been appointed by the churches to travel with us while we are administering this generous undertaking for the glory of the Lord himself and to show our goodwill.' (8:18-19) So this unnamed brother has both a recognizable gift of evangelism but also is specifically 'appointed' by the churches for this project of relief and unity. Discernment of gifts already being practiced and official authorization by 'all the churches' (not just one church) are key biblical parts of 'ordination'.
Paul is being perfectly open with the Corinthians, which, incidentally, is another important aspect of ordination. 'We intend that no one should blame us about this generous gift that we are administering, for we intend to do what is right in the Lord's sight but also in the sight of others.' (8:20-21). He is not doing anything in secret and is covering himself from any future misunderstandings. His actions are open to being seen as right not only by the Lord, but also by 'others' (all the churches).
He then continues by mentioning a second unnamed brother: 'And with them we are sending our brother whom we have often tested and found eager in these matters, but who is now more eager than ever because of his great confidence in you.' (8:22) So these three 'bearers of the word', and envoys of all the churches, are described as 'partners and co-workers', 'well known and appointed', 'tested and eager'.[33]
In our contemporary Church of England context, 'common fund' and 'common orders' come to mind. Diocesean 'common fund' contributions are designed to share resources for mission across the diocese irrespective of 'tradition'. 'Common orders' relate to this. Those ordained are all under Christ, part of each other, and of the bishop and thereby linked to the Church throughout the centuries and throughout the world today. Ignoring the bishop, setting up separatist churches, which are not part of the 'common fund', leads, as we have seen, towards the setting up of separate 'orders'.
Conclusion
In conclusion, these ordinations in Surbiton were precipitate and not judicious. They were hastily arranged, just after the Reform conference, and were conducted in secret. In Paul's first letter to Timothy, we are all warned against precipitate ordinations: 'Do not ordain anyone hastily, and do not participate in the sins of others; keep yourself pure.' 1 Timothy 5:22. The context is one of respecting the elders (v. 1 and v. 17) and of caution against partiality (v. 21).
Being judicious involves imitating the grace, generosity and openness that Paul commends in 2 Corinthians and which are ultimately focused in our Lord Jesus Christ (2 Cor 8:9).
Yours in Christ,
Graham Kings
Canon Dr Graham Kings is vicar of St Mary Islington, theological secretary of Fulcrum and a member of the Liturgical Commission
The notes in the text are hyperlinked into the end notes; to return to the text, click on the end note number
[1]The entry for 'Order' in Brewer's Dictionary reads: 'When members of the House of Commons and other debaters call out 'order' they mean that the person speaking is in some way breaking the rule of the order of the assembly, and has to be called to order'. Ivor Evans (ed.), Brewers Dictionary of Phrase and Fable (London: Cassell, 1981) s.v.
[2]Andy Fenton, Richard Perkins, and Loots Lambrechts, to serve in church plants in the south London area.
[3] The Vicar, the Revd Graham Wintle, is chairman of Reform Southwark.
[4] Richard Coekin. He has written his explanation in 'No Option but to Ordain' Church of England Newspaper, 11 November 2005. Coekin is a leader in the Co-Mission Initiative, an independent evangelical group, with church plants in Kingston, Balham and Wimbledon in the Diocese of Southwark, and Mayfair in the Diocese of London (though his 'Permission to Officiate' in the Diocese of London expired in 2002). He is also Chairman of the London Men's Convention.
[5] www.reform.org.uk Wallace Benn, Bishop of Lewes, an Area Bishop in the Diocese of Chichester, was not present at the ordination, and that evening was speaking to the London Diocesan Evangelical Fellowship at All Souls Clubhouse, urging caution against precipitate action. At the Reform conference immediately before the ordination, Bishop Martin Morrison gave a key note address and the conference gave backing to the ordination.
[6] www.southwark.anglican.org/bishops.htm
[7] www.cesa.org.za/pages/who_we_are.htm See also Colin Craston, 'The 'Church of England in South Africa' and England', Fulcrum article, 18 November 2005. Craston is a former Chair of the Anglican Consultative Council.
[8] Paul Perkin, Vicar of St Mark's, Battersea Rise, in the diocese of Southwark, and a member of Reform, also took part in the laying on of hands during the ordination. This is surprising on two accounts: he is a member of General Synod, and presbyters do not usually lay on hands at the ordination of deacons.
[9] To consult the Canons and Handbook of Procedures of CESA, download the files from www.cesa.org.za/pages/who_we_are.htm. See especially Canon V concerning Licensing and Section 5 of the Handbook concerning Ordained Ministers, Selection and Training. It seems that Bishop Morrison may well not have followed the Procedures of his own church.
[10] www.southwark.anglican.org/news/pr297.htm
[11] www.sanderstead-parish.org.uk/html/body_a_letter_to_bishop_tom.html A letter organized by Simon Butler and Andrew Rumsey. See also the important context-setting article by Stephen Kuhrt 'Why I as an Evangelical Anglican in the Diocese of Southwark support Bishop Tom Butler in his action against Rev Richard Coekin' Church of England Newspaper, 17 November 2005.
[12] www.co-mission.org.uk/ordination.php The Executive Secretary of Anglican Mainstream UK, Chris Sugden, was amongst the first signatories and was present at the ordinations. However, for Anglican Mainstream's official 'Comment' on the ordinations see www.anglican-mainstream.net/Nov05/13nov05.html.
[13] www.anglican-mainstream.net/Nov05/24nov05c.html
[14] With unseen irony, an article in Christianity Today used the title 'Bishop' of Coekin. 'Bishop Richard Coekin, minister of Dundonald Church in Wimbledon, was warned in a letter from the Bishop of Southwark, the Rt Rev Tom Butler, he would lose his licence if the ordinations of Andy Fenton and Richard Perkins went ahead.'
[15] www.chpublishing.co.uk/product.asp?id=68225
[16] www.freshexpressions.org.uk/index.asp?id=1
[17] www.freshexpressions.org.uk/standard.asp?id=1182
[18] www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/page.cfm?ID=60. Stephen Kurht is administrative secretary of Fulcrum.
[19] www.reform.org.uk/bb/waysforward.html
[20] www.reform.org.uk/bb/panelofref.html
[21] www.sanderstead-parish.org.uk/html/body_a_letter_to_bishop_tom.html
[22] For a discussion of these terms, see www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/page.cfm?ID=2
[23] The Anglican Mainstream 'comment', signed by Philip Giddings and Chris Sugden (see above note 13), manifests the tension involved, even when using the Reform language of 'necessary action' (see above) concerning the document 'A Way Forward': 'We understand the reasons for this but we regret that action contrary to Canon Law was considered necessary in order to sustain biblically faithful ministry.' www.anglican-mainstream.net/Nov05/13nov05.html
[24] Hugh Evan Hopkins, Charles Simeon of Cambridge (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1977), p. 213-14.
[25] Just before his death, Simeon paid a courtesy call of welcome on the newly appointed Bishop of Ely, Joseph Allen, on 21 September 1836. Hopkins, Simeon, 210.
[26] Christian Observer, August 1858, p. 663.
[27] The 21 volumes of his sermons. Charles Simeon, Horae Homileticae or Discourses digested into one continued series, and forming a commentary upon every book of the Old Testament and New Testament... (London, 1845) 7th edition.
[28] 'Renewing the evangelical centre' has a double meaning of 'renewing the moderate centre of the evangelical tradition' and also 'renewing the centre of the Church of England which historically, and again currently, is evangelical.' www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/page.cfm?ID=12
[29] E. Sidney, The Life of the Rev Rowland Hill p. 161 cited in Hopkins, Simeon, p. 214.
[30] www.cesa.org.za/pages/39_articles/39_articles_of_religion.htm
[31] See also the relevance of articles 34 'On the Traditions of the Church' and 36 'On the Consecration of Bishops and Ministers'
[32] For Fulcrum's position on sexual ethics, see What is the Evangelical Centre?; see also Fulcrum response to the Civil Partnership Act and Fulcrum Response to the Bishops' Statement on the Civil Partnership Act
[33] It may be worth reading the last three chapters of 2 Corinthians, which includes the following: 'We do not dare to classify or compare ourselves with some of those who commend themselves. But when they measure themselves by one another, and compare themselves with one another, they do not show good sense. We, however, will not boast beyond limits, but will keep within the field that God has assigned to us, to reach out even as far as you.' (10:12-13).
The Rt Revd Dr Graham Kings is Honorary Assistant Bishop in the Diocese of Ely and Research Associate at the Cambridge Centre for Christianity Worldwide.