Church of England Heresy Trials New proposals in the Church of England seek to replace the expensive and little-used system of ‘consistory courts’ with a new fast-track system which has been dubbed ‘heresy courts’. These would be headed by bishops and advised by panels of theologians, and would hear cases in which priests were alleged to have erred on doctrine, ritual or ceremonial.
Jonathan Petre, the Religion Correspondent of the UK newspaper ‘The Daily Telegraph’, reported that sceptic ' priests could face trial by heresy courts (22 Dec 2003). He wrote, ‘Some bishops also want to rid the Church of its reputation for believing “everything and nothing”.
Traditionalists believe that if clerics are properly trained in the Canons and are obliged to swear an oath to uphold them, there will be fewer breaches’. (If clergy abide by this there will indeed be more cassocks and fewer breeches!) Those who favour the courts hope that the new system will define the limits of diversity permissible in the C of E. However, according to Petre, ‘Liberals fear that the plans, which are due to be debated by the General Synod next summer, will lead to witch-hunts. The Sea of Faith group, whose members believe that the Bible is little more than a collection of myths, numbers dozens of Anglican clerics among its sympathisers.’ Patti Whaley, Chair of the Sea of Faith UK, penned a reply to the article, reprinted here in full.
Dear Sir The article concerning ‘heresy courts’ (22 Dec 2003) illustrates some of the very misunderstandings that make Flotsal liberal priests fear heresy trials.
In some ways, the recommendations of the working party of the House of Bishops are welcome. They recommend a disciplinary system which conforms to basic principles of natural justice, such as the right to a clear statement of accusations, and the right to respond to those accusations. Anthony Freeman, who your correspondent correctly notes was sacked in 1993, was denied that measure of due process, a fact more or less admitted in "Under Authority", the initial report on clergy discipline issued in 1996. If there must be heresy trials, let us by all means have fair ones.
It is certainly not correct to say that 'since [1847], clergy and bishops have been able to deviate from traditional doctrine with little fear of punishment.
Formal heresy trials are not the only measure of repression. In addition to the sacking of Anthony Freeman, many priests have been called in for private ‘interviews’, presented with pre-written letters of apology or resignation, or given indications that they were on the secret ‘Archbishop's caution list’ which circulates among Church of England bishops. The response to Bishop John AT Robinson's bestselling book, Honest to God, was typical — he was sidelined by the Church for the rest of his career. Many people join the Sea of Faith not because they are ‘atheists’, but because they have realised that they cannot explore new theological approaches with their own parish priest.
But it is the accusation that "Sea of Faith...members believe that the Bible is little more than a collection of myths" which exposes how difficult it is for liberals and conservatives to understand each other on this question.
The idea that the Bible is not to be understood as literal, historical truth is very well established in Anglican history, and only the most extreme conservatives believe that every part of the Bible is to be understood as literal truth. More importantly, to believe that the Bible is heavily mythologized is not to dismiss it, but to understand it as the central record of how Jews and Christians have hammered out their evolving understanding of the human condition. It remains the book which defines the Christian sense of sacredness in the world, whether that sacredness is understood in a supernatural or entirely natural sense. What we fear about heresy trials is that this more nuanced discussion about truth and meaning in the Bible or in Christian theology will be sacrificed to the need for authority, conformity and simple answers.
On the same day as this article appeared, Channel 4 ran a 90-minute special on the Catholic Church's treatment of Galileo, who claimed that when Biblical _ interpretation and scientific exploration conflict, Biblical interpretation needs to change. Although the Catholic Church has finally admitted that its condemnation of Galileo was wrong, the battle that he framed is still being fought. Anglican Theological Education In January Robert Patterson, the Secretary of ‘Theological Education for the Anglican Communion’, wrote to The Independent newspaper to set minds at rest about the current Anglican difficulties over the gap between the theology known by the clergy and the laity respectively.
He said that theological education was a priority for the life of the Anglican Communion, and that the Primates had therefore set up a task group called Theological Education for the Anglican Communion (TEAC). ‘The group, which is committed to delivering its final report to the Primates and the Anglican Consultative Council by 2006-2007, in time for the next Lambeth Conference, has as the aims of its work: e to deliver a well-focused challenge to be a Communion of Christians who read the Bible together in the fullest awareness of who, when and where we are; e to strengthen the sense of why we are Anglicans and what sort of Church we want to be; ¢ to make clear suggestions as to how theological education can be delivered with appropriate professionalism and ecumenical alertness; and * to create a culture of teaching and learning in the faith community.
The work of TEAC will range widely across several key areas for theological education, looking at education for Bishops, for Priests, for Permanent Deacons and ‘Lay Leaders, and for the Laity as a whole. It will also include a special focus on what is called 'The Anglican Way' - asking what it means to be Anglican and how this can be effectively incorporated into theological education at all levels.
The membership of TEAC is drawn from most of the Provinces of the Anglican Communion, and will be consulting widely as it engages in its task during the next few years.’ The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, addressed the group. Reminding TEAC of the words of Ephesians 4, 'to equip the saints for the work of ministry, until all of us come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God’, he pointed out that ‘theological education was important for mission because it is only when we properly understand our faith that we can share with others the good news of what is different and new.’ It’s reassuring to know that while heresy trials are being established to prevent erroneous doctrine there is still some willingness to consider ‘what is different and new’. SoF members who are already thinking what is ‘different and new’ within the Anglican tradition may care to write to the task group at the following address:
Clare Amos (Coordinator, TEAC) Anglican Communion office St Andrews House 157 Waterloo Road London SE1 8UT Email: clare.amos@anglicancommunion.org PART 9: