John L. Allen Jr. of the National Catholic Reporter interviewed Ephraim Radner this week. Dr. Radner was in town to participate in “Harvesting the Fruits,” a summit hosted by the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity that, in Allen’s words, gathered “leading lights from the Catholic church, Anglicanism, Lutheranism, Methodism, and the Reformed churches.”

Here’s a sample:

What’s the future of the Anglican Communion?

We’re at a crossroads. One thing I’ve learned is that crises are always much more extended than you think they’re going to be. You keep thinking, unless they figure this out now, the whole thing is going to fall apart. That’s not quite true, it’s more slow-motion than that.

It’s a crossroads we’ve identified for several years now: Will the Communion become two separate functioning groups, not just in spirit — which in some sense it already is, but not quite — but also structurally, between a more conservative global South with some other Western appendages, and a Western-type Anglo church, more liberal in different ways and to different degrees. That’s certainly a real possibility. I keep changing my bets every week … at the moment, I put it at 50/50.

If it does happen, in my view there are two real losses. One is that Anglicanism in the West is not exactly flourishing. Of course, lots of churches aren’t flourishing, for lots of reasons. But Anglicanism is not well-placed to flourish in the U.S. or England. It won’t go away, but it’s shrinking, and it will lose it sense of why it’s there. There will still be arguments going on. It’s not exactly a death wish, but it’s certainly not a prescription for health.

In the global South, who knows what it could mean? But it might mean a kind of self-consignment to an “Evangelicalizing” of Anglicanism. Again, it won’t disappear, but it will become increasingly indistinct from a whole realm of Evangelical Protestant churches which, in some ways, I think, are ephemeral in the long term as ecclesial realities. I believe in the church as something visible and real.

The full interview is available here.
View the original post

I am ever interested in reading what Ephraim writes.  I find this below (from the full interview) a tad provocative:

Anglo-Catholicism of the kind of Newman sort, those who see him as their patron or paradigm, has slowly disappeared over the last century within the Anglican church. Even in my own lifetime, Anglo-Catholicism has become more or less a dead movement, and it has been for decades. That’s partly a result of the kind of Anglicans involved in that, as well as the dilution of theological integrity within Anglicanism in general, which has meant that there wasn’t a fertile ground for these things to grow. It became sort of ritualistic, grouped in little cliques. There are certainly still good and worthy Anglo-Catholics, more so in England, but at least in North American they can be hard to find, and those who are there you wouldn’t necessarily want to encourage. They’re been part of a problem, not a stream of vitality in the church. Those who are most interested in leaving Anglicanism and joining the Catholic church in a formal way tend not to come from there, but there are actually a lot of ex-evangelicals.

I come from the opposite end of the Anglican spectrum but have developed a deep respect for so many of my Anglo Catholic brethren.  Theirs is not ritualism for the sake of it (I am sure there are exceptions).  I only experience them as cliquish when finding themselves a persecuted minority, and once they discover a degree of commonality they become fast sisters and brothers.  They were indeed hugely persecuted in the nineteenth century in England and that memory sticks with them.  The fellowship we share does not mean that I suddenly become doctrinally like them, nor they like me.  Usually what binds us together is a high Christology, sense of mission and personal pursuit of holiness.  Yes, we also share a high view of the Scriptures.  We are of course allies in confronting the heterodoxy of the leaders of TEC.

When serving in the Diocese of London (in the 1970’s), which has traditionally been more Anglo Catholic - I was blessed by their fellowship.  IMHO Englnd suffered from polarization between Anglo Catholics and Evangelicals in those days and I regretted that.  I have served in one of the most famous TEC Anglo Catholic Dioceses - Fond du Lac - and my long term colleague was certainly very much of the Anglo Catholic community.  It was interesting there that so many folk could not understand our friendship and brotherhood in ministry!  That ministry worked and was a joy.  I have taught at Nashotah House and been blessed to be a guest of that community over several years.  I believe that Nashotah House is thriving, growing and has given the Anglican world a renewed sense of Anglican Mission and vitality.  I have fast friends in what are now the non-TEC Dioceses of Quincy and Fort Worth.  I am a huge admirer of Bishop Iker and have been friends with Bishop Ackerman for nearly thirty year, believing him to be one of the saints of the Church. 

If my friends and I want to nit-pick (sometimes we do over dinner and just for the delight of theological discourse) we can, and find areas that divide. What in fact we do is agree to disagree for the sake of the Gospel.  We are united in mission - we seek to bring Jesus to people and people to Jesus.  I believe that the ACNA community is seeking to behave in just this way and it delights me.  I should add that in my times of service in Western Massachusetts and in Louisiana I was privileged to serve along side Roman Catholic clergy from time to time - WOW what a blessing.

One more comment.  In my times in East Africa - Kenya - and my relationships with Tanzanian Anglicans, I have found the same commonality.  Tanzania was evangelized by both USPG and CMS.  In so many ways their distinctive churchmanship can still be seen.  I have not experienced a lack of zeal, vitality nor shared missionary commitment. 

I am not ready to agree with what Ephraim is reported to have said.